Token-by-Token Regeneration and Domain Biases: A Benchmark of LLMs on Advanced Mathematical Problem-Solving
On the map: LLM reasoning → Mathematical reasoning
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models (LLMs) excel in many natural language tasks, yet they struggle with complex mathemat-ical problem-solving, particularly in symbolic reasoning and maintaining consistent output. This study evalu-ates 10 LLMs with 7 to 8 billion parameters using 945 competition-level problems from the MATH dataset. The focus is on their ability to generate executable Python code as a step in their reasoning process, involving over 9,450 code executions. The research introduces an evaluation framework using mistral-large-2411 to rate answers on a 5-point scale, which helps address inconsistencies in mathematical notation. It also examines the impact of regenerating output token-by-token on refining results. The findings reveal a significant 34.5% per-formance gap between the top commercial model (gpt-4o-mini, scoring 83.7%) and the least effective open-source model (open-codestral-mamba:v0.1, scoring 49.2%). This disparity is especially noticeable in complex areas like Number Theory. While token-by-token regeneration slightly improved accuracy (+0.8%) for the model llama3.1:8b, it also reduced code execution time by 36.7%, highlighting a trade-off between efficiency and precision. The study also noted a consistent trend where harder problems correlated with lower accuracy across all models. Despite using controlled execution environments, less than 1% of the generated code was unsafe, and 3.17% of problems remained unsolved after 10 attempts, suggesting that hybrid reasoning methods may be beneficial.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Mathematical reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 7 of its 18 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Jan 2025.
Builds on
7 of 18 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2024Can Language Models Rival Mathematics Students? Evaluating Mathematical Reasoning through Textual Manipulation and Human Experiments16 Dec
- 2022Solving Quantitative Reasoning Problems with Language Models29 Jun
Other references · 5
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
- 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,320
- 2021Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Datasetcited by 5,371
- 2024Mixtral of Expertscited by 1,823
- 2024A Comprehensive Survey of Hallucination Mitigation Techniques in Large Language Modelscited by 269
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 2.
2 papers.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Do LLMs Overthink Basic Math Reasoning? Benchmarking the Accuracy-Efficiency Tradeoff in Language Models
- 2024MARIO: MAth Reasoning with code Interpreter Output -- A Reproducible Pipeline
- 2024Tokenization counts: the impact of tokenization on arithmetic in frontier LLMs
- 2025Evaluation of LLMs for mathematical problem solving
- 2025Evaluating Intermediate Reasoning of Code-Assisted Large Language Models for Mathematics
- 2025Can LLMs textitunderstand Math? -- Exploring the Pitfalls in Mathematical Reasoning
- 2024Evaluating Mathematical Reasoning of Large Language Models: A Focus on Error Identification and Correction
- 2024Investigating Symbolic Capabilities of Large Language Models