MATH Benchmark
BenchmarkFree12.5K competition math problems — AMC/AIME/Olympiad level, 7 subjects, standard math benchmark.
Capabilities10 decomposed
competition-mathematics problem dataset loading with multi-subject stratification
Medium confidenceLoads 12,500 curated competition mathematics problems from AMC 10, AMC 12, AIME, and Math Olympiad sources via the MATHDataset class, which preprocesses problems with optional solution step inclusion and supports multiple tokenization strategies. The dataset is stratified across 7 mathematical subjects (Prealgebra, Algebra, Number Theory, Counting/Probability, Geometry, Intermediate Algebra, Precalculus) enabling subject-specific evaluation and analysis. Problems are stored in structured JSON format with problem statements, solutions, and answer fields, allowing researchers to load subsets by difficulty or subject.
Implements subject-stratified loading of 12,500 competition problems from authoritative sources (AMC, AIME, Olympiads) with integrated tokenization pipeline and optional solution step inclusion, rather than synthetic problem generation or smaller curated sets. The MATHDataset class provides flexible preprocessing supporting both with-solution and solution-free evaluation modes.
Larger and more rigorous than GSM8K (8.5K problems) and uses authentic competition problems rather than synthetic generation, making it the standard benchmark for mathematical reasoning evaluation in LLM research.
semantic mathematical equivalence verification with latex and algebraic normalization
Medium confidenceImplements the is_equiv() function in math_equivalence.py that determines whether two mathematical expressions are semantically equivalent by applying a multi-stage string normalization pipeline. The system handles LaTeX formatting, fraction representations, algebraic simplification, numerical precision issues, and common mathematical symbols through regex-based transformations and symbolic comparison. Rather than exact string matching, it normalizes both expressions into canonical forms before comparison, enabling robust answer verification across different notational styles (e.g., '1/2' vs '0.5' vs '\frac{1}{2}').
Implements a multi-stage string normalization pipeline specifically tuned for competition mathematics notation, handling LaTeX, fractions, units, and algebraic forms through regex transformations rather than symbolic algebra. The is_equiv() function applies ordered normalization steps (whitespace removal, LaTeX conversion, fraction standardization, numerical approximation) enabling robust comparison across notational variants without external symbolic libraries.
Lighter-weight and faster than SymPy-based equivalence checking (no symbolic algebra overhead) while handling the specific notational patterns in competition mathematics; more robust than exact string matching but less comprehensive than full symbolic algebra systems for complex expressions.
local gpt-style model evaluation with configurable beam search and sampling
Medium confidenceProvides eval_math_gpt.py with a run_eval() function that evaluates locally-hosted GPT-style language models on MATH problems using configurable beam search and sampling parameters. The evaluation system generates multiple candidate answers per problem (via beam search or temperature-based sampling), compares each against ground truth using the mathematical equivalence system, and aggregates accuracy metrics. Supports both greedy decoding and stochastic sampling strategies, enabling evaluation of model robustness and uncertainty quantification.
Implements configurable beam search and temperature-based sampling for local model evaluation with tight integration to the mathematical equivalence system, enabling multi-candidate answer generation and robust accuracy measurement. The run_eval() function orchestrates the full pipeline from problem loading through answer generation to equivalence verification and metric aggregation.
Enables local evaluation without API calls (faster iteration, no rate limits, privacy-preserving) while supporting multiple decoding strategies for uncertainty analysis; less convenient than API-based evaluation but more flexible for research and custom model evaluation.
openai gpt-3 api-based remote model evaluation with rate limiting
Medium confidenceProvides evaluate_gpt3.py that interfaces with OpenAI's GPT-3 API for remote model evaluation on MATH problems, handling API authentication, request batching, rate limiting, and result aggregation. The system submits problem statements to the API, collects model-generated solutions, and verifies correctness using the mathematical equivalence system. Implements retry logic and rate-limit handling to manage API quotas and ensure reliable evaluation across large problem sets.
Implements OpenAI API integration with built-in rate limiting, retry logic, and request batching for robust evaluation of GPT-3 models on MATH problems. The evaluate_gpt3.py module handles authentication, quota management, and result aggregation, abstracting away API complexity while maintaining tight integration with the mathematical equivalence verification system.
Enables evaluation of proprietary models without local infrastructure or model weights; simpler than local evaluation setup but incurs API costs and is subject to rate limits and model availability.
subject-stratified accuracy metric aggregation and analysis
Medium confidenceAggregates per-problem accuracy results across the 7 mathematical subjects (Prealgebra, Algebra, Number Theory, Counting/Probability, Geometry, Intermediate Algebra, Precalculus) to produce subject-specific and overall accuracy metrics. The system computes accuracy rates, confidence intervals, and failure analysis grouped by subject, enabling fine-grained understanding of model strengths and weaknesses across mathematical domains. Supports visualization and reporting of subject-level performance differences.
Implements subject-stratified accuracy aggregation specifically for the 7 mathematical subjects in the MATH dataset, enabling fine-grained performance analysis across domains. The system groups results by subject and computes per-subject metrics, supporting domain-specific evaluation and failure analysis.
More granular than overall accuracy metrics alone, enabling identification of subject-specific model weaknesses; less sophisticated than full statistical analysis frameworks but integrated directly into the evaluation pipeline.
problem difficulty and solution complexity analysis
Medium confidenceAnalyzes problem difficulty and solution complexity by examining problem metadata (source competition, year, round) and solution characteristics (length, algebraic complexity, required techniques). The system categorizes problems by difficulty tier (e.g., AMC 10 vs AIME vs Olympiad) and enables filtering and analysis of model performance across difficulty levels. Supports identification of which difficulty tiers present the greatest challenges for language models.
Implements difficulty classification based on authentic competition sources (AMC 10/12, AIME, Olympiad) with metadata-driven complexity analysis, enabling evaluation of how model performance scales across competition difficulty tiers. The system leverages problem source and round information to stratify results without requiring external difficulty annotation.
Provides difficulty-stratified evaluation using authentic competition structure rather than synthetic difficulty scores; simpler than semantic complexity analysis but directly aligned with real mathematical competition progression.
dataset split management and train-test separation
Medium confidenceManages dataset splits (train/test/validation) and ensures proper separation to prevent data leakage during model evaluation. The system loads problem subsets based on split configuration, supports multiple split strategies (random, subject-stratified, difficulty-stratified), and validates that evaluation is performed only on designated test sets. Enables reproducible evaluation by supporting fixed random seeds and split versioning.
Implements explicit train-test split management with support for multiple stratification strategies (random, subject-stratified, difficulty-stratified) and reproducible split generation via fixed random seeds. The system enforces separation between training and evaluation data to prevent data leakage.
Provides explicit split management with multiple stratification options, more flexible than fixed splits but requires manual configuration; essential for rigorous evaluation methodology.
solution step extraction and step-by-step reasoning evaluation
Medium confidenceExtracts and structures solution steps from problem solutions, enabling evaluation of intermediate reasoning quality and step-by-step correctness. The system parses solution text to identify individual steps, validates each step's mathematical correctness, and measures whether models can generate correct intermediate reasoning. Supports evaluation of both final answer accuracy and solution quality (e.g., whether the reasoning path is sound).
Implements solution step extraction and step-level correctness verification, enabling evaluation of intermediate reasoning quality beyond final answer accuracy. The system parses solutions into steps and validates each step using the mathematical equivalence system, supporting fine-grained analysis of reasoning correctness.
Provides step-level evaluation for deeper reasoning analysis compared to final-answer-only metrics; more complex to implement and requires structured solution formatting, but enables richer evaluation of reasoning quality.
batch evaluation orchestration with result caching and resumption
Medium confidenceOrchestrates batch evaluation of models across all 12,500 problems with built-in result caching and resumption capability. The system manages evaluation state, caches intermediate results to disk, and supports resuming interrupted evaluations without re-running completed problems. Implements progress tracking, logging, and error handling to ensure reliable evaluation across long-running benchmark jobs.
Implements batch evaluation orchestration with result caching and resumption capability, enabling long-running evaluations to survive interruptions without re-running completed problems. The system manages evaluation state, tracks progress, and supports efficient result retrieval from cache.
Enables efficient evaluation of large problem sets with interruption recovery; more complex than simple sequential evaluation but essential for practical evaluation of 12,500-problem benchmarks.
multi-model comparative evaluation and leaderboard generation
Medium confidenceSupports evaluation of multiple models on the same benchmark and generates comparative leaderboards ranking models by accuracy. The system runs evaluations for different models (local, API-based, or hybrid), aggregates results, and produces ranked leaderboards with per-subject accuracy breakdowns. Enables side-by-side comparison of model performance and identification of best-performing models across different mathematical domains.
Implements multi-model evaluation and leaderboard generation with subject-stratified ranking, enabling comparative analysis of multiple models on the same benchmark. The system aggregates results across models and produces ranked leaderboards with fine-grained subject-level performance breakdowns.
Provides integrated comparative evaluation and leaderboard generation; more convenient than manual result aggregation but requires consistent evaluation methodology across all models.
Capabilities are decomposed by AI analysis. Each maps to specific user intents and improves with match feedback.
Related Artifactssharing capabilities
Artifacts that share capabilities with MATH Benchmark, ranked by overlap. Discovered automatically through the match graph.
MATH
12.5K competition math problems across 7 subjects and 5 difficulty levels.
MMLU (Massive Multitask Language Understanding)
57-subject benchmark, the standard metric for comparing LLMs.
GSM8K
8.5K grade school math problems — multi-step reasoning, verifiable solutions, reasoning benchmark.
gsm8k
Dataset by openai. 8,22,680 downloads.
Google: Gemma 3 4B
Gemma 3 introduces multimodality, supporting vision-language input and text outputs. It handles context windows up to 128k tokens, understands over 140 languages, and offers improved math, reasoning, and chat capabilities,...
Google: Gemma 3 27B
Gemma 3 introduces multimodality, supporting vision-language input and text outputs. It handles context windows up to 128k tokens, understands over 140 languages, and offers improved math, reasoning, and chat capabilities,...
Best For
- ✓AI researchers benchmarking language model mathematical reasoning capabilities
- ✓Teams evaluating reasoning-focused LLMs against competition-standard problems
- ✓Researchers studying domain-specific performance across mathematical subjects
- ✓Researchers evaluating LLM mathematical reasoning on competition problems
- ✓Systems requiring robust answer verification across heterogeneous notational styles
- ✓Automated grading systems for mathematics problems with multiple valid representations
- ✓Researchers with local GPU infrastructure evaluating custom or open-source language models
- ✓Teams benchmarking models that cannot be sent to external APIs (proprietary, on-premise)
Known Limitations
- ⚠Dataset is static and curated for 2021 publication — no dynamic problem generation or updates
- ⚠Problems are English-language only — no multilingual variants
- ⚠Requires manual download from Berkeley server (not automated via pip)
- ⚠No built-in filtering for problem difficulty beyond subject stratification
- ⚠Regex-based normalization may not handle all edge cases in complex symbolic expressions
- ⚠No symbolic algebra engine (e.g., SymPy) integration — relies on string transformations and numerical approximation
Requirements
Input / Output
UnfragileRank
UnfragileRank is computed from adoption signals, documentation quality, ecosystem connectivity, match graph feedback, and freshness. No artifact can pay for a higher rank.
About
12,500 challenging competition mathematics problems from AMC, AIME, and Math Olympiads. Tests mathematical reasoning across 7 subjects. Problems range from algebra to number theory. Standard math reasoning benchmark.
Categories
Alternatives to MATH Benchmark
Build high-quality LLM apps - from prototyping, testing to production deployment and monitoring.
Compare →Amplication brings order to the chaos of large-scale software development by creating Golden Paths for developers - streamlined workflows that drive consistency, enable high-quality code practices, simplify onboarding, and accelerate standardized delivery across teams.
Compare →Are you the builder of MATH Benchmark?
Claim this artifact to get a verified badge, access match analytics, see which intents users search for, and manage your listing.
Get the weekly brief
New tools, rising stars, and what's actually worth your time. No spam.
Data Sources
Looking for something else?
Search →