arXiv:2604. 18584v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Mathematical problem solving remains a challenging test of reasoning for large language and multimodal models, yet existing benchmarks are limited in size, language coverage, and task diversity.
By Shaden Alshammari, Kevin Wen, Abrar Zainal, Mark Hamilton, Navid Safaei, Sultan Albarakati, William T. Freeman, Antonio Torralba
The paper introduces HorizonMath, a benchmark of 113 largely unsolved mathematical problems across eight domains, paired with an open-source framework for automated verification. It focuses on the generator‑verifier gap, targeting problems that are hard to discover but easy to verify computationally, thereby avoiding costly formal proof verification or manual review. Using this framework, the authors found six novel solutions—three each from GPT‑5.4 Pro and GPT‑5.6 Sol—demonstrating that current models can contribute to mathematical research, while most state‑of‑the‑art models score below 10%.
By Erik Y. Wang, Sumeet R. Motwani, James V. Roggeveen, Eliot Hodges, Dulhan Jayalath, Charles London, Kalyan Ramakrishnan, Jakob Foerster, Cheng Zhang, Flaviu Cipcigan, Philip Torr, Alessandro Abate
arXiv:2607. 13899v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We propose the AIMO Interpretability Challenge, a competition on distinguishing robust from spurious reasoning in frontier mathematical language models based on the models' internal mechanisms.
By Michal \v{S}tef\'anik, Philipp Mondorf, Andreas Waldis, Qianying Liu, Chuan Yang, Michal Spiegel, Josef Kucha\v{r}, Marek Kadl\v{c}\'ik, Adam Vawda-Oomerjee, Chaoran Liu, Simon Frieder, Barbara Plank, Fazl Barez, Pontus Stenetorp
The paper introduces the AI Mathematician (AIM) framework, which leverages Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) to tackle frontier mathematical research. AIM addresses the complexity and procedural rigor of research problems through an exploration mechanism for longer solution paths and a pessimistic reasonable verification method for reliability. Early experiments show AIM can autonomously construct significant proof components and uncover non‑trivial insights across real‑world mathematical topics.
By Yuanhang Liu, Yanxing Huang, Yanqiao Wang, Peng Li, Yang Liu
Benchmark saturation and data contamination increasingly obscure genuine scientific reasoning in frontier LLMs. We introduce \textsc{ScienceArena}, an olympiad-style benchmark from thirteen public sci...
arXiv:2608.30517v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Benchmark saturation and data contamination increasingly obscure genuine scientific reasoning in frontier LLMs. We introduce \textsc{ScienceArena}, an...
By Guangxiang Zhao, Qilong Shi, Xusen Xiao, Wenpu Liu, Yaoming Li, Linfeng Hao, Shuyang Hou, Zijian Guo, Xinrui Zhang, Yuntian Zhao, Zhengyang Wang, Wenrui Liu, Yuhan Wu, Tong Yang, Lin Sun, Xiangzheng Zhang
arXiv:2607. 14178v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recent advances in Large Language Models have fueled autonomous AI agents capable of tackling complex scientific tasks, yet existing automated research systems remain predominantly focused on empirically driven domains with quantitative benchmarks, leaving theory-driven discovery, particularly in mathematically grounded disciplines requiring rigorous proofs and synthesis of domain knowledge, largely underexplored.
By Yutong He, Daibo Li, Guohong Li, Jiahe Geng, Zhengyang Huang, Can Ren, Zekun Zhang, Yifan Liu, Shuchen Zhu, Hengrui Zhang, Boao Kong, Ming Sun, Shu Li, Chenyi Li, Jiang Hu, Kun Yuan, Zaiwen Wen, Pingwen Zhang
Large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable performance on high-school and olympiad-style mathematics, yet their capabilities on advanced mathematics remain poorly understood. Existing benchmarks, however, fall short in both scope and evaluation granularity: they provide limited disciplinary coverage and often rely on final-answer correctness or coarse judgments, leaving the validity of the reasoning process inadequately assessed.
arXiv:2607. 14582v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Existing LLM-based theorem provers have achieved impressive results on formal mathematics benchmarks, yet they remain confined to acting as autonomous agents that prove a stated proposition.
By Junjie Zhang, Jiayu Liu, Wenbin Liu, Zhenya Huang, Doudou Wang, Yan Jiang, Leiye Xu, Tao Xiong, Wen Huang, Qi Liu, Guoping Hu, Enhong Chen, Mengping Zhang, Xiangdong Ye
arXiv:2607. 06820v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recent advances in AI for Mathematics have focused largely on autoformalization and theorem proving, leaving the role of Computer Algebra Systems (CAS) in agentic LLM workflows underexplored.
By Pavel Snopov, German Magai
arXiv:2602. 16793v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: In the past year, custom and unreleased math reasoning models reached gold medal performance on the International Mathematical Olympiad (IMO).
By Xingyu Dang, Rohit Agarwal, Rodrigo Porto, Anirudh Goyal, Liam H Fowl, Sanjeev Arora
arXiv:2602. 20629v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: As Large Language Models (LLMs) saturate elementary benchmarks, the research frontier has shifted from generation to the reliability of automated evaluation.
By Santiago Gonzalez, Alireza Amiri Bavandpour, Peter Ye, Edward Zhang, Ruslans Aleksejevs, Todor Anti\'c, Polina Baron, Sujeet Bhalerao, Shubhrajit Bhattacharya, Zachary Burton, John Byrne, Hyungjun Choi, Nujhat Ahmed Disha, Koppany Istv\'an Encz, Yuchen Fang, Robert Joseph George, Ebrahim Ghorbani, Alan Goldfarb, Jing Guo, Meghal Gupta, Stefano Huber, Annika Kanckos, Minjung Kang, Hyun Jong Kim, Dino Lorenzini, Levi Lorenzo, Tianyi Mao, Giovanni Marzenta, Ariane M. Masuda, Lukas Mauth, Ana Mickovic, Andres Miniguano-Trujillo, Antoine Moulin, Wenqi Ni, Tomos Parry, Kevin Ren, Hossein Roodbarani, Mathieu Rundstr\"om, Manjil Saikia, Detchat Samart, Rebecca Steiner, Connor Stewart, Dhara Thakkar, Jeffrey Tse, Vasiliki Velona, Yunhai Xiang, Sibel Yal\c{c}{\i}n, Jun Yan, Ji Zeng, Arman Cohan, Quanquan C. Liu