SciBench: Evaluating College-Level Scientific Problem-Solving Abilities of Large Language Models

22 Sept 2023 (modified: 11 Feb 2024)Submitted to ICLR 2024EveryoneRevisionsBibTeX
Primary Area: datasets and benchmarks
Code Of Ethics: I acknowledge that I and all co-authors of this work have read and commit to adhering to the ICLR Code of Ethics.
Keywords: scientific computing, problem solving, large language models
Submission Guidelines: I certify that this submission complies with the submission instructions as described on https://iclr.cc/Conferences/2024/AuthorGuide.
Abstract: Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated notable progress on many mathematical benchmarks. However, most of these benchmarks only feature problems grounded in junior and senior high school subjects, contain only multiple-choice questions, and are confined to a limited scope of elementary arithmetic operations. To address these issues, this paper introduces an expansive benchmark suite SciBench that aims to systematically examine the reasoning capabilities required for complex scientific problem solving. SciBench contains two carefully curated datasets: an open set featuring a range of collegiate-level scientific problems drawn from mathematics, chemistry, and physics textbooks, and a closed set comprising problems from undergraduate-level exams in computer science and mathematics. Based on the two datasets, we conduct an in-depth benchmark study of two representative LLMs with various prompting strategies. The results reveal that current LLMs fall short of delivering satisfactory performance, with an overall score of merely 35.80%. Furthermore, through a detailed user study, we categorize the errors made by LLMs into ten problem-solving abilities. Our analysis indicates that no single prompting strategy significantly outperforms others and some strategies that demonstrate improvements in certain problem-solving skills result in declines in other skills. We envision that SciBench will catalyze further developments in the reasoning abilities of LLMs, thereby ultimately contributing to scientific research and discovery.
Anonymous Url: I certify that there is no URL (e.g., github page) that could be used to find authors' identity.
Supplementary Material: pdf
No Acknowledgement Section: I certify that there is no acknowledgement section in this submission for double blind review.
Submission Number: 4694
Loading