about
Lila: A Unified Benchmark for Mathematical Reasoning (arxiv.org)
43 points by negativelambda on Dec 31, 2022 | hide | past | pdf | 4 comments on HN

In plain words: A collection of 23 math tasks—from arithmetic to calculus, across question styles and languages—where each answer comes with a Python program showing the steps. Training one model on all tasks beat separate per-task models by 21.8% on average, but the best scored 60.4%.

Abstract

Mathematical reasoning skills are essential for general-purpose intelligent systems to perform tasks from grocery shopping to climate modeling. Towards evaluating and improving AI systems in this domain, we propose LILA, a unified mathematical reasoning benchmark consisting of 23 diverse tasks along four dimensions: (i) mathematical abilities e.g., arithmetic, calculus (ii) language format e.g., question-answering, fill-in-the-blanks (iii) language diversity e.g., no language, simple language (iv) external knowledge e.g., commonsense, physics. We construct our benchmark by extending 20 datasets benchmark by collecting task instructions and solutions in the form of Python programs, thereby obtaining explainable solutions in addition to the correct answer. We additionally introduce two evaluation datasets to measure out-of-distribution performance and robustness to language perturbation. Finally, we introduce BHASKARA, a general-purpose mathematical reasoning model trained on LILA. Importantly, we find that multi-tasking leads to significant improvements (average relative improvement of 21.83% F1 score vs. single-task models), while the best performing model only obtains 60.40%, indicating the room for improvement in general mathematical reasoning and understanding.

Swaroop Mishra, Matthew Finlayson, Pan Lu, Leonard Tang, Sean Welleck, Chitta Baral, Tanmay Rajpurohit, Oyvind Tafjord, Ashish Sabharwal, Peter Clark, Ashwin Kalyan
arXiv:2210.17517 · cs.CL, cs.AI · submitted Oct 31, 2022 · updated Mar 8, 2023
abstract · pdf · html · EMNLP 2022

add comment on HN

It would have been nice to have a list with an example for each of the 23 tasks. Have I missed it?
They have a lot of examples in the appendix, just scroll to after the references.
On page 24, figure 6 right, I think the “gold answer” is incorrect. It should be 160. It may have been copy-paste-not edited from the gold answer on page 22, figure 4 right.
Seeing those insane advances really makes me itch to go back into academia. AI that can do math really feels like we're about to crack 'it'.