# ProcessBench: Identifying Process Errors in Mathematical Reasoning

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.06559 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.06559/

## Key facts

- Cited by 292 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reinforcement learning for reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 24 of its 29 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 9 Dec 2024.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Reinforcement learning for reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/lr/reinforcement-learning-for-reasoning/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 24 of 24)

- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttention](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.06180/) (2023)
- [Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Dataset](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.03874/) (2021)
- [GPT-4o System Card](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.21276/) (2024)
- [Let's Verify Step by Step](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.20050/) (2023)
- [Qwen2 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.10671/) (2024)
- [Concrete Problems in AI Safety](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1606.06565/) (2016)
- [Qwen2.5-Coder Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.12186/) (2024)
- [OlympiadBench: A Challenging Benchmark for Promoting AGI with Olympiad-Level Bilingual Multimodal Scientific Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.14008/) (2024)
- [Qwen2.5-Math Technical Report: Toward Mathematical Expert Model via Self-Improvement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.12122/) (2024)
- [Large Language Models Cannot Self-Correct Reasoning Yet](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.01798/) (2023)
- [Math-Shepherd: Verify and Reinforce LLMs Step-by-step without Human Annotations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.08935/) (2023)
- [Improve Mathematical Reasoning in Language Models by Automated Process Supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.06592/) (2024)
- [Self-critiquing models for assisting human evaluators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.05802/) (2022)
- [Omni-MATH: A Universal Olympiad Level Mathematic Benchmark For Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.07985/) (2024)
- [When Can LLMs Actually Correct Their Own Mistakes? A Critical Survey of Self-Correction of LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.01297/) (2024)
- [Measuring Progress on Scalable Oversight for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.03540/) (2022)
- [LLM Critics Help Catch LLM Bugs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.00215/) (2024)
- [CriticBench: Benchmarking LLMs for Critique-Correct Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.14809/) (2024)
- [Building Math Agents with Multi-Turn Iterative Preference Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.02392/) (2024)
- [Is Your Model Really A Good Math Reasoner? Evaluating Mathematical Reasoning with Checklist](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.08733/) (2024)
- [Towards Scalable Automated Alignment of LLMs: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.01252/) (2024)
- [Yi-Lightning Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.01253/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 30 of 292)

- [Search-o1: Agentic Search-Enhanced Large Reasoning Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.05366/) (2025)
- [The Lessons of Developing Process Reward Models in Mathematical Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.07301/) (2025)
- [Towards Reasoning Era: A Survey of Long Chain-of-Thought for Reasoning Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.09567/) (2025)
- [From System 1 to System 2: A Survey of Reasoning Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.17419/) (2025)
- [Which Agent Causes Task Failures and When? On Automated Failure Attribution of LLM Multi-Agent Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.00212/) (2025)
- [PhysBench: Benchmarking and Enhancing Vision-Language Models for Physical World Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.16411/) (2025)
- [From LLM Reasoning to Autonomous AI Agents: A Comprehensive Review](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.19678/) (2025)
- [VisualPRM: An Effective Process Reward Model for Multimodal Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.10291/) (2025)
- [Can 1B LLM Surpass 405B LLM? Rethinking Compute-Optimal Test-Time Scaling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.06703/) (2025)
- [Process Reward Models That Think](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.16828/) (2025)
- [A Survey of Frontiers in LLM Reasoning: Inference Scaling, Learning to Reason, and Agentic Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.09037/) (2025)
- [Reward-Guided Speculative Decoding for Efficient LLM Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.19324/) (2025)
- [PRMBench: A Fine-grained and Challenging Benchmark for Process-Level Reward Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.03124/) (2025)
- [GenPRM: Scaling Test-Time Compute of Process Reward Models via Generative Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.00891/) (2025)
- [Agent-R: Training Language Model Agents to Reflect via Iterative Self-Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.11425/) (2025)
- [Formal Mathematical Reasoning: A New Frontier in AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.16075/) (2024)
- [AceMath: Advancing Frontier Math Reasoning with Post-Training and Reward Modeling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.15084/) (2024)
- [InternLM-XComposer2.5-Reward: A Simple Yet Effective Multi-Modal Reward Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.12368/) (2025)
- [Evaluating Step-by-step Reasoning Traces: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.12289/) (2025)
- [PhysReason: A Comprehensive Benchmark towards Physics-Based Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.12054/) (2025)
- [Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.12501/) (2025)
- [A Comprehensive Survey of Reward Models: Taxonomy, Applications, Challenges, and Future](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.12328/) (2025)
- [A Survey on Large Language Models for Mathematical Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.08446/) (2025)
- [Stop Summation: Min-Form Credit Assignment Is All Process Reward Model Needs for Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.15275/) (2025)
- [UGPhysics: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Undergraduate Physics Reasoning with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.00334/) (2025)
- [Evaluating Judges as Evaluators: The JETTS Benchmark of LLM-as-Judges as Test-Time Scaling Evaluators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.15253/) (2025)
- [SPC: Evolving Self-Play Critic via Adversarial Games for LLM Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.19162/) (2025)
- [A Survey of Test-Time Compute: From Intuitive Inference to Deliberate Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.02497/) (2025)
- [VersaPRM: Multi-Domain Process Reward Model via Synthetic Reasoning Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.06737/) (2025)
- [RL Tango: Reinforcing Generator and Verifier Together for Language Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.15034/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

As language models regularly make mistakes when solving math problems, automated identification of errors in the reasoning process becomes increasingly significant for their scalable oversight. In this paper, we introduce ProcessBench for measuring the ability to identify erroneous steps in mathematical reasoning. It consists of 3,400 test cases, primarily focused on competition- and Olympiad-level math problems. Each test case contains a step-by-step solution with error location annotated by human experts. Models are required to identify the earliest step that contains an error, or conclude that all steps are correct. We conduct extensive evaluation on ProcessBench, involving two types of models: process reward models (PRMs) and critic models, where for the latter we prompt general language models to critique each solution step by step. We draw two main observations: (1) Existing PRMs typically fail to generalize to more challenging math problems beyond GSM8K and MATH. They underperform both critic models (i.e., prompted general language models) and our own trained PRM that is straightforwardly fine-tuned on the PRM800K dataset. (2) The best open-source model, QwQ-32B-Preview, has demonstrated the critique capability competitive with the proprietary model GPT-4o, despite that it still lags behind the reasoning-specialized o1-mini. We hope ProcessBench can foster future research in reasoning process assessment, paving the way toward scalable oversight of language models.