Skip to content

Improving Mathematical Reasoning Capabilities in Large Language Models via Reasoning Process Error Classification

Sep 2026 · 0 citations · 27 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

The types of errors that arise in LLMs'reasoning processes on mathematical datasets are clarified and manually analyze the features of reasoning errors.

Abstract

The reasoning ability of large language models (LLMs) is a critical factor for practical LLM-based applications. To investigate the current reasoning capability of LLMs, we clarify the types of errors that arise in LLMs'reasoning processes on mathematical datasets. We focus on problems where LLMs produce an incorrect answer. We define errors in the reasoning process as reasoning errors and manually analyze the features of reasoning errors. We defined and classified 21 error classes and identified the frequently occurring classes among them. Beyond qualitative evaluation, we leverage the evaluation results to improve the reasoning capability. We designed a prompt that explicitly focuses on eight error classes. The experiments demonstrate that this prompt effectively improves reasoning performance. Furthermore, the results suggest that the frequent reasoning errors identified in this paper are common across LLMs of comparable scale.

View source

Similar papers

#artificial intelligence Preprint Aug 2026

Beyond Surface Forms: Symbolic Edits as a Test for Logical Reasoning with LLMs

Logical reasoning with large language models (LLMs) is a critical capability, as it reflects a system's ability to correctly deduce hypotheses from a given context using faithful deductive processes. However, LLM reasoning has often been shown to be sensitive to small surface-level variations in problem formulation, ra...

Ramya Keerthy Thatikonda, W. Buntine, Ehsan Shareghi · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

Cognitive Profiling of LRMs'Reasoning Traces Using Bloom's Taxonomy

This work introduces a framework for automatic annotation of reasoning steps through the lens of Bloom's Taxonomy, which classifies thinking into six cognitive levels, such as Remembering, Applying and Evaluating, and demonstrates that thinking-type information derived from reasoning traces correlates with correctness,...

Maria-Eleni Zoumpoulidi, Georgios Paraskevopoulos, A. Potamianos · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

Reasoning Jury: Multi-Model Consensus for Evaluating Reasoning Traces

Reasoning Jury, a system that replaces the single judge with a jury of LLMs and a moderated consensus mechanism, is introduced to improve the fidelity of judgments for identifying reasoning defects and can be leveraged to understand failure modes of reasoning LLMs on benchmarks, which allows much deeper understanding o...

Congchao Wang, D. Singh, Qiaozi Gao et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

RuleWeaver: Benchmarking Rule-Centered Scenario Reasoning for Large Language Models

RuleWeaver is introduced, a benchmark construction framework for evaluating rule-centered scenario reasoning that starts from corpus-derived IF-THEN Meta Rules, progressively augments them into complex rules, and composes these rules into rule-centered scenario QA instances.

Bo-Han Yu, Shi-Yang Li, Pengfei Cao et al. · 0 citations

Related blog posts

MIT News · Artificial Intelligence Sep 24, 2026

Estimating suicide risk from text

A new language-processing tool could help identify the highest-risk individuals from natural language, enabling swifter interventions.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.