mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

LLM The Genius Paradox: A Linguistic and Math Expert's Struggle with Simple Word-based Counting Problems

arXiv 2410.14166 ↗First posted 18 Oct 2024cs.CL cs.AIcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Interestingly, LLMs yet struggle with some basic tasks that humans find trivial to handle, e.g., counting the number of character r's in the word "strawberry". There are several popular conjectures (e.g., tokenization, architecture and training data) regarding the reason for deficiency of LLMs in simple word-based counting problems, sharing the similar belief that such failure stems from model pretraining hence probably inevitable during deployment. In this paper, we carefully design multiple evaluation settings to investigate validity of prevalent conjectures. Meanwhile, we measure transferability of advanced mathematical and coding reasoning capabilities from specialized LLMs to simple counting tasks. Although specialized LLMs suffer from counting problems as well, we find conjectures about inherent deficiency of LLMs invalid and further seek opportunities to elicit knowledge and capabilities from LLMs that are beneficial to counting tasks. Compared with strategies such as finetuning and in-context learning that are commonly adopted to enhance performance on new or challenging tasks, we show that engaging reasoning is the most robust and efficient way to help LLMs better perceive tasks with more accurate responses. We hope our conjecture validation design could provide insights into the study of future critical failure modes of LLMs. Based on challenges in transferring advanced capabilities to much simpler tasks, we call for more attention to model capability acquisition and evaluation. We also highlight the importance of cultivating consciousness of "reasoning before responding" during model pretraining.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 18 Oct 2024.

Builds on

0 of 0 references.

No references here yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 1.

3 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025A Fragile Number Sense: Probing the Elemental Limits of Numerical Reasoning in LLMs
  2. 2024Exposing the Achilles' Heel: Evaluating LLMs Ability to Handle Mistakes in Mathematical Reasoning
  3. 2024From Blind Solvers to Logical Thinkers: Benchmarking LLMs' Logical Integrity on Faulty Mathematical Problems
  4. 2025Large Language Models and Mathematical Reasoning Failures
  5. 2024Can Language Models Rival Mathematics Students? Evaluating Mathematical Reasoning through Textual Manipulation and Human Experiments
  6. 2025FINEREASON: Evaluating and Improving LLMs' Deliberate Reasoning through Reflective Puzzle Solving
  7. 2025Thinking Machines: Mathematical Reasoning in the Age of LLMs
  8. 2025Mathematical Reasoning in Large Language Models: Assessing Logical and Arithmetic Errors across Wide Numerical Ranges