# Scaling Relationship on Learning Mathematical Reasoning with Large Language Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.01825 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.01825/

## Key facts

- Cited by 427 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Mathematical reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 41 of its 54 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 3 Aug 2023.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Mathematical reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/lr/mathematical-reasoning/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 41)

- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.13971/) (2023)
- [Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.09288/) (2023)
- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [Scaling Laws for Neural Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.08361/) (2020)
- [Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.11171/) (2022)
- [PaLM: Scaling Language Modeling with Pathways](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.02311/) (2022)
- [Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.11916/) (2022)
- [Let's Verify Step by Step](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.20050/) (2023)
- [Finetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.01652/) (2021)
- [Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.10601/) (2023)
- [Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.08073/) (2022)
- [Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.15556/) (2022)
- [Emergent Abilities of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.07682/) (2022)
- [Solving Quantitative Reasoning Problems with Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.14858/) (2022)
- [PaLM 2 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.10403/) (2023)
- [Hindsight Experience Replay](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1707.01495/) (2017)
- [Scaling Laws for Reward Model Overoptimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.10760/) (2022)
- [STaR: Bootstrapping Reasoning With Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.14465/) (2022)
- [Solving math word problems with process- and outcome-based feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.14275/) (2022)
- [Show Your Work: Scratchpads for Intermediate Computation with Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.00114/) (2021)
- [Are NLP Models really able to Solve Simple Math Word Problems?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.07191/) (2021)
- [GLM-130B: An Open Bilingual Pre-trained Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.02414/) (2022)
- [RAFT: Reward rAnked FineTuning for Generative Foundation Model Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.06767/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models Can Self-Improve](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.11610/) (2022)
- [Scaling Laws for Autoregressive Generative Modeling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.14701/) (2020)
- [RRHF: Rank Responses to Align Language Models with Human Feedback without tears](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.05302/) (2023)
- [Analysing Mathematical Reasoning Abilities of Neural Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.01557/) (2019)
- [Preference Ranking Optimization for Human Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.17492/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 30 of 427)

- [DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.03300/) (2024)
- [Qwen2.5 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.15115/) (2024)
- [Qwen Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.16609/) (2023)
- [Qwen2 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.10671/) (2024)
- [Scaling LLM Test-Time Compute Optimally can be More Effective than Scaling Model Parameters](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.03314/) (2024)
- [Qwen2.5-Math Technical Report: Toward Mathematical Expert Model via Self-Improvement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.12122/) (2024)
- [Math-Shepherd: Verify and Reinforce LLMs Step-by-step without Human Annotations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.08935/) (2023)
- [MetaMath: Bootstrap Your Own Mathematical Questions for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.12284/) (2023)
- [WizardMath: Empowering Mathematical Reasoning for Large Language Models via Reinforced Evol-Instruct](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.09583/) (2023)
- [Self-Play Fine-Tuning Converts Weak Language Models to Strong Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.01335/) (2024)
- [MAmmoTH: Building Math Generalist Models through Hybrid Instruction Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.05653/) (2023)
- [SWIFT:A Scalable lightWeight Infrastructure for Fine-Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.05517/) (2024)
- [Beyond Human Data: Scaling Self-Training for Problem-Solving with Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.06585/) (2023)
- [ReST-MCTS*: LLM Self-Training via Process Reward Guided Tree Search](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.03816/) (2024)
- [Demystifying Long Chain-of-Thought Reasoning in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.03373/) (2025)
- [rStar-Math: Small LLMs Can Master Math Reasoning with Self-Evolved Deep Thinking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.04519/) (2025)
- [Alphazero-like Tree-Search can Guide Large Language Model Decoding and Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.17179/) (2023)
- [We-Math: Does Your Large Multimodal Model Achieve Human-like Mathematical Reasoning?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.01284/) (2024)
- [SWE-smith: Scaling Data for Software Engineering Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.21798/) (2025)
- [ToRA: A Tool-Integrated Reasoning Agent for Mathematical Problem Solving](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.17452/) (2023)
- [Rewarding Progress: Scaling Automated Process Verifiers for LLM Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.08146/) (2024)
- [Step-DPO: Step-wise Preference Optimization for Long-chain Reasoning of LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.18629/) (2024)
- [SAM 3D: 3Dfy Anything in Images](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.16624/) (2025)
- [How Abilities in Large Language Models are Affected by Supervised Fine-tuning Data Composition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.05492/) (2023)
- [V-STaR: Training Verifiers for Self-Taught Reasoners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.06457/) (2024)
- [NVILA: Efficient Frontier Visual Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.04468/) (2024)
- [Agent Q: Advanced Reasoning and Learning for Autonomous AI Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.07199/) (2024)
- [Many-Shot In-Context Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.11018/) (2024)
- [VinePPO: Refining Credit Assignment in RL Training of LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.01679/) (2024)
- [Direct Nash Optimization: Teaching Language Models to Self-Improve with General Preferences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.03715/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Mathematical reasoning is a challenging task for large language models (LLMs), while the scaling relationship of it with respect to LLM capacity is under-explored. In this paper, we investigate how the pre-training loss, supervised data amount, and augmented data amount influence the reasoning performances of a supervised LLM. We find that pre-training loss is a better indicator of the model's performance than the model's parameter count. We apply supervised fine-tuning (SFT) with different amounts of supervised data and empirically find a log-linear relation between data amount and model performance, and we find better models improve less with enlarged supervised datasets. To augment more data samples for improving model performances without any human effort, we propose to apply Rejection sampling Fine-Tuning (RFT). RFT uses supervised models to generate and collect correct reasoning paths as augmented fine-tuning datasets. We find with augmented samples containing more distinct reasoning paths, RFT improves mathematical reasoning performance more for LLMs. We also find RFT brings more improvement for less performant LLMs. Furthermore, we combine rejection samples from multiple models which push LLaMA-7B to an accuracy of 49.3% on GSM8K which outperforms the supervised fine-tuning (SFT) accuracy of 35.9% significantly.