# Evaluating Large Language Models on Computer Science University Exams in Data Structures

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.23347 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.23347/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 6 of its 9 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 25 Apr 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 6 of 6)

- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.03300/) (2020)
- [GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.12022/) (2023)
- [GSM-Symbolic: Understanding the Limitations of Mathematical Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.05229/) (2024)
- [Evaluating the Effectiveness of LLMs in Introductory Computer Science Education: A Semester-Long Field Study](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.13414/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

We present a comprehensive evaluation of Large Language Models (LLMs) on Computer Science (CS) Data Structure examination questions. Our work introduces a new benchmark dataset comprising exam questions from Tel Aviv University (TAU), curated to assess LLMs' abilities in handling closed and multiple-choice questions. We evaluated the performance of OpenAI's GPT 4o and Anthropic's Claude 3.5, popular LLMs, alongside two smaller LLMs, Mathstral 7B and LLaMA 3 8B, across the TAU exams benchmark. Our findings provide insight into the current capabilities of LLMs in CS education.