Multi Step Mathematical Reasoning Benchmark Evaluation

via “solution step extraction and intermediate reasoning evaluation”

12.5K competition math problems — AMC/AIME/Olympiad level, 7 subjects, standard math benchmark.

Unique: Preserves solution steps as first-class data throughout the evaluation pipeline, enabling evaluation of intermediate reasoning quality rather than just final answers. This supports emerging research on chain-of-thought prompting and interpretable AI reasoning.

vs others: More comprehensive than final-answer-only evaluation because it assesses reasoning quality and interpretability, but requires more manual annotation and is harder to automate than simple answer verification.

via “multimodal mathematical reasoning evaluation across visual domains”

Visual mathematical reasoning benchmark.

Unique: Combines visual understanding with mathematical problem-solving across three newly created datasets (IQTest, FunctionQA, PaperQA) plus 28 existing multimodal datasets, totaling 6,141 examples with explicit focus on compositional reasoning where visual perception and mathematical logic must be jointly applied. Unlike single-domain benchmarks, MathVista spans geometry, statistics, and scientific figures, exposing differential model performance across mathematical reasoning types.

vs others: Broader than domain-specific benchmarks (e.g., geometry-only or chart-only) and more rigorous than general vision-language benchmarks because it requires both accurate visual interpretation AND correct mathematical reasoning, not just image captioning or visual QA on non-mathematical content.

via “zero-shot mathematical reasoning evaluation”

Zero-shot LLM evaluation for reasoning tasks.

Unique: Implements unified zero-shot evaluation specifically designed to isolate reasoning capability from few-shot learning effects, with multi-format answer extraction that handles LaTeX, symbolic, and natural language mathematical expressions without requiring model-specific output formatting

vs others: Differs from general LLM benchmarks (MMLU, GSM8K) by explicitly removing few-shot examples and standardizing evaluation across mathematical domains, providing cleaner signal for foundational reasoning ability

via “arithmetic and mathematical reasoning evaluation”

23 hardest BIG-Bench tasks where models initially failed.

Unique: Focuses specifically on multi-step arithmetic and mathematical reasoning through few-shot examples, isolating numerical reasoning capability from general language understanding. Tasks test both calculation accuracy and mathematical inference patterns.

vs others: More focused on mathematical reasoning than general reasoning benchmarks; more accessible than formal mathematics verification because it uses natural language problem statements rather than symbolic notation.

via “grade-school science question benchmark evaluation”

7.8K science questions testing genuine reasoning, not just recall.

Unique: Explicitly designed to filter out questions answerable by retrieval or word co-occurrence — the Challenge subset (2,590 questions) was curated by removing questions that simple baseline methods could solve, ensuring the remaining questions require genuine multi-step reasoning and knowledge application rather than surface-level pattern matching

vs others: More rigorous than generic QA benchmarks because it explicitly excludes questions solvable by shallow methods, making it a stricter test of reasoning; smaller and more focused than MMLU but with deeper curation for reasoning-specific evaluation

via “multi-step numerical reasoning over financial documents”

8.3K financial reasoning questions over real S&P 500 earnings reports.

Unique: Combines real SEC filing documents (not synthetic) with crowdsourced questions requiring multi-step arithmetic, creating a hybrid dataset that tests both domain knowledge extraction and quantitative reasoning in a single evaluation task. Unlike generic math word problems, answers require locating figures within 10+ page documents first.

vs others: More challenging than DROP or SVAMP because it requires financial domain knowledge AND document retrieval before arithmetic, whereas generic math benchmarks assume figures are already extracted

via “multi-step mathematical reasoning benchmark evaluation”

8.5K grade school math problems — multi-step reasoning, verifiable solutions, reasoning benchmark.

Unique: Uses linguistically diverse, human-authored grade school problems (not synthetic) that require genuine multi-step reasoning with basic arithmetic, combined with a standardized answer extraction format (#### delimiter) that enables reproducible evaluation across heterogeneous model outputs

vs others: More challenging than simple arithmetic benchmarks (requires 2-8 reasoning steps) yet more accessible than advanced math benchmarks, making it ideal for measuring practical reasoning improvements in production models

via “mathematical reasoning with math benchmark performance”

Meta's 70B open model matching 405B-class performance.

Unique: Achieves strong mathematical reasoning performance at 70B parameters through instruction-tuning on mathematical problem-solving datasets, enabling competitive MATH benchmark performance without specialized symbolic reasoning modules

vs others: Provides mathematical reasoning capability comparable to larger closed-source models while remaining open-weight and self-hostable, though without formal verification guarantees of symbolic math systems

via “benchmark dataset for mathematical reasoning”

12.5K competition math problems across 7 subjects and 5 difficulty levels.

Unique: This dataset includes detailed step-by-step solutions for each problem, making it unique for training AI in mathematical reasoning.

vs others: Unlike other datasets, MATH provides a structured approach to evaluating mathematical reasoning with competition-level problems and solutions.

via “mathematical reasoning and problem-solving”

671B MoE model matching GPT-4o at fraction of training cost.

Unique: Achieves 90.2% on MATH benchmark through MoE architecture that routes mathematical reasoning tokens through specialized expert parameters, enabling efficient scaling of reasoning capability without proportional increase in active parameters per token

vs others: Matches GPT-4o mathematical reasoning performance (90.2% MATH) while using 37B active parameters vs GPT-4o's undisclosed parameter count, reducing inference latency and cost for math-heavy workloads

via “mathematical reasoning with math benchmark 80+ and structured problem-solving”

Alibaba's 72B open model trained on 18T tokens.

Unique: Integrates three distinct reasoning paradigms (CoT for symbolic reasoning, PoT for code-based computation, TIR for external tool orchestration) within single 72B dense model, enabling flexible problem-solving strategies without model switching. 128K context window allows full problem histories and solution verification within single inference call.

vs others: Outperforms Llama 2 70B (significantly lower math performance) and matches Llama 3 70B on general benchmarks while offering specialized math reasoning patterns; Qwen2.5-Math 72B variant provides deeper specialization but general-purpose 72B enables seamless math-to-code-to-text transitions without model switching.

via “mathematical reasoning with 96.8% gsm8k accuracy”

Largest open-weight model at 405B parameters.

Unique: 405B parameter scale enables 96.8% GSM8K performance through learned chain-of-thought patterns in transformer architecture, achieving near-human accuracy on grade-school math without external symbolic engines or calculators

vs others: Larger model scale than most open-source alternatives improves mathematical reasoning accuracy; however, lacks symbolic verification that specialized math engines provide, making it suitable for reasoning tasks but not formal proofs

via “benchmark-validated reasoning performance on standardized datasets”

Alibaba's 32B reasoning model with chain-of-thought.

Unique: Provides documented benchmark results on standardized reasoning datasets (AIME 79.5%, MATH-500 96.4%) enabling quantitative performance validation, with explicit comparison claims against larger models

vs others: Demonstrates competitive reasoning performance on standardized benchmarks comparable to much larger models, providing quantitative evidence of reasoning capability for evaluation and comparison purposes

via “mathematical reasoning and step-by-step problem solving”

DeepSeek's 236B MoE model specialized for code.

Unique: Trained on 6 trillion tokens including mathematical reasoning datasets and code-based solutions, enabling both symbolic reasoning and code generation for mathematical problems in a single model without separate math-specific components

vs others: Provides integrated mathematical reasoning and code generation (unlike Copilot which focuses on code) while maintaining open-source weights and supporting local deployment

via “mathematical reasoning and step-by-step problem solving”

text-generation model by undefined. 1,37,84,608 downloads.

Unique: Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct includes explicit training on mathematical reasoning datasets (including GSM8K, MATH, and proprietary datasets) with emphasis on showing intermediate steps and justifying answers. The instruction-tuning includes prompts that encourage the model to 'think step by step' and 'show your work', which are known to improve mathematical reasoning through in-context learning effects.

vs others: Outperforms base Qwen2.5-7B on mathematical reasoning benchmarks by 15-20% due to instruction-tuning; more accessible than specialized math models (like Minerva) for general-purpose deployment

via “mathematical problem solving with symbolic reasoning”

Cost-efficient reasoning model with configurable effort levels.

Unique: Implements specialized mathematical reasoning patterns with step-by-step derivation generation, achieving competition-level math performance through domain-specific training rather than general reasoning

vs others: Matches o3 on mathematical benchmarks at lower cost; outperforms standard LLMs (GPT-4, Claude) on competition-level problems due to reasoning-grade capabilities

via “multi-step reasoning evaluation”

Graduate-level science questions requiring reasoning

Unique: The benchmark's focus on graduate-level questions requiring multi-step reasoning sets it apart from simpler benchmarks like MMLU, which often focus on knowledge recall.

vs others: More rigorous than MMLU due to its emphasis on deep domain expertise and multi-step reasoning.

via “advanced mathematical problem evaluation”

Competition mathematics problems (harder than GSM8K)

Unique: MATH's dataset is specifically curated from high school math contests, providing a unique challenge that is more difficult than typical benchmarks, allowing for a clearer differentiation of model capabilities.

vs others: More challenging than GSM8K, making it a superior choice for evaluating advanced mathematical reasoning in AI models.

via “multi-step mathematical reasoning evaluation”

Grade school math problems requiring multi-step reasoning

Unique: GSM8K is specifically curated to include a diverse set of multi-step reasoning problems, making it more targeted than generic math datasets, allowing for precise evaluation of reasoning capabilities in LLMs.

vs others: More focused on multi-step reasoning than other benchmarks like MATH, which may include less structured problems.

via “mathematical reasoning and logic problem evaluation with specialized scoring”

ReLE评测：中文AI大模型能力评测（持续更新）：目前已囊括374个大模型，覆盖chatgpt、gpt-5.4、谷歌gemini-3.1-pro、Claude-4.6、文心ERNIE-X1.1、ERNIE-5.0、qwen3.6-max、qwen3.6-plus、百川、讯飞星火、商汤senseChat等商用模型， 以及step3.5-flash、kimi-k2.6、ernie4.5、MiniMax-M2.7、deepseek-v4、Qwen3.6、llama4、智谱GLM-5.1、MiMo-V2、LongCat、gemma4、mistral等开源大模型。不仅提供排行榜，也提供规模超200万的大

Unique: Evaluates mathematical reasoning with 1-5 quality scale for reasoning steps rather than binary correctness, enabling partial credit for correct methodology with computational errors. Combines final answer accuracy with reasoning quality assessment to capture mathematical thinking capability. Includes multi-step reasoning problems and logical inference tasks beyond simple arithmetic.

vs others: More nuanced mathematical assessment than MMLU (binary correctness) and captures reasoning quality vs answer-only evaluation