# Right Answer, Wrong Method: Shortcut Hacking Misleads the Evaluation of LLM Reasoning on Frontier Science Benchmarks

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.02442 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.02442/

## 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 28 of its 36 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 3 Aug 2026.

## Placed in

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

## Builds on (most cited first, 28 of 28)

- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Dataset](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.03874/) (2021)
- [Let's Verify Step by Step](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.20050/) (2023)
- [Shortcut Learning in Deep Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.07780/) (2020)
- [OlympiadBench: A Challenging Benchmark for Promoting AGI with Olympiad-Level Bilingual Multimodal Scientific Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.14008/) (2024)
- [Scaling Laws for Reward Model Overoptimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.10760/) (2022)
- [Solving math word problems with process- and outcome-based feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.14275/) (2022)
- [GSM-Symbolic: Understanding the Limitations of Mathematical Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.05229/) (2024)
- [Monitoring Reasoning Models for Misbehavior and the Risks of Promoting Obfuscation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.11926/) (2025)
- [MathArena: Evaluating LLMs on Uncontaminated Math Competitions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.23281/) (2025)
- [ProcessBench: Identifying Process Errors in Mathematical Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.06559/) (2024)
- [Omni-MATH: A Universal Olympiad Level Mathematic Benchmark For Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.07985/) (2024)
- [SciBench: Evaluating College-Level Scientific Problem-Solving Abilities of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.10635/) (2023)
- [FrontierMath: A Benchmark for Evaluating Advanced Mathematical Reasoning in AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.04872/) (2024)
- [Defining and Characterizing Reward Hacking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.13085/) (2022)
- [Don't Make Your LLM an Evaluation Benchmark Cheater](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.01964/) (2023)
- [A Careful Examination of Large Language Model Performance on Grade School Arithmetic](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.00332/) (2024)
- [Sycophancy to Subterfuge: Investigating Reward-Tampering in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.10162/) (2024)
- [MATH-Perturb: Benchmarking LLMs' Math Reasoning Abilities against Hard Perturbations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.06453/) (2025)
- [Proof or Bluff? Evaluating LLMs on 2025 USA Math Olympiad](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.21934/) (2025)
- [Challenging the Boundaries of Reasoning: An Olympiad-Level Math Benchmark for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.21380/) (2025)
- [The Leaderboard Illusion](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.20879/) (2025)
- [PHYBench: Holistic Evaluation of Physical Perception and Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.16074/) (2025)
- [Answer Matching Outperforms Multiple Choice for Language Model Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.02856/) (2025)
- [Direct Evaluation of Chain-of-Thought in Multi-hop Reasoning with Knowledge Graphs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.11199/) (2024)
- [Brains vs. Bytes: Evaluating LLM Proficiency in Olympiad Mathematics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.01995/) (2025)
- [From Calculation to Adjudication: Examining LLM judges on Mathematical Reasoning Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.04168/) (2024)
- [Solving Inequality Proofs with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.07927/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [REMEDY: How Far Is Video Generation from Medical Education World Models?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.32460/) (2026)
- [Are We Measuring Scientific Intelligence? Rethinking the Evaluation of AI Scientists](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.04915/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Scientific reasoning benchmarks typically evaluate large language models (LLMs) using final-answer accuracy. However, a correct answer does not necessarily demonstrate the reasoning capability targeted by the problem. We identify Solution Hacking, a failure mode in which an LLM reaches the correct answer through invalid shortcuts, such as numerical search, enumeration, guessing, or answer-first verification, without providing a valid task-targeted derivation. We systematically analyze this phenomenon across difficulty levels, scientific domains, and frontier models. Solution hacking increases sharply with benchmark difficulty, from 2.2% on common problems to 28.3% on Olympiad-level problems and 37.4% on HLE. Moreover, 8.2%-44.1% of answers credited as correct across frontier models are identified as hacked solutions. We further develop expert-inspired anti-hacking strategies, including an automatic judge and a test-time instruction. The results show that suppressing shortcut behavior substantially reduces reported accuracy while having a smaller effect on correct and non-hacked accuracy. These findings reveal that answer-only evaluation can overestimate the scientific reasoning capabilities of frontier LLMs.
