PRISM-Physics: Causal DAG-Based Process Evaluation for Physics Reasoning
Wanjia Zhao, Qinwei Ma, Jingzhe Shi, Shirley Wu, Jiaqi Han, Yijia Xiao, Si-Yuan Chen, Xiao Luo, Ludwig Schmidt, James Y. Zou
Abstract
Benchmarks for competition-style reasoning have advanced evaluation in mathematics and programming, yet physics remains comparatively underexplored. Most existing physics benchmarks evaluate only final answers, which fail to capture reasoning processes, while recent stepwise methods rely on heuristic LLM-as-judge scoring or restrictive linear assumptions, limiting reliability and diagnostic validity. We introduce PRISM-Physics, a process-level evaluation framework and benchmark for complex physics reasoning problems. Solutions are represented as directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) of formulas, explicitly encoding causal dependencies among intermediate steps to enable fine-grained, interpretable, and theoretically grounded scoring. We prove the optimality of the DAG representation and the corresponding scoring policy. Combining with a fully rule-based method for symbolic formula equivalence matching that we developed, we ensure consistent validation across diverse formulations without heuristic judgments. Results show that our evaluation framework is more aligned with human experts' scoring. Experiments on state-of-the-art LLMs reveal persistent reasoning failures in physics, while step-level scoring offers both diagnostic insight and rich signals for later training. By combining structural rigor, theoretical guarantees, and symbolic validation, PRISM-Physics provides a principled foundation for advancing process-level evaluation and guiding the development of models with deeper scientific reasoning capabilities.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Cited by top-tier papers2
- TSRBench: A Comprehensive Multi-task Multi-modal Time Series Reasoning Benchmark for Generalist ModelsFangxu Yu, Xingang Guo, Lingzhi Yuan, Haoqiang Kang et al.ICML 2026
- Scientific logicality enriched methodology for LLM reasoning: A practice in physicsZhaoxin Yu, Nan Xu, Kun Chen, Jiahao Zhao et al.ICML 2026
Builds on9
- PAL: Program-aided Language ModelsLuyu Gao, Aman Madaan, Shuyan Zhou, Uri Alon et al.ICML 2023 · 700 citations
- G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using Gpt-4 with Better Human AlignmentYang Liu, Dan Iter, Yichong Xu, Shuohang Wang et al.EMNLP 2023 · 549 citations
- miniF2F: a cross-system benchmark for formal Olympiad-level mathematicsKunhao Zheng, Jesse Michael Han, Stanislas PoluICLR 2022 · 342 citations
- SciBench: Evaluating College-Level Scientific Problem-Solving Abilities of Large Language ModelsXiaoxuan Wang, Ziniu Hu, Pan Lu, Yanqiao Zhu et al.ICML 2024 · 220 citations
- PhysReason: A Comprehensive Benchmark towards Physics-Based ReasoningXinyu Zhang, Yuxuan Dong, Yanrui Wu, Jiaxing Huang et al.ACL 2025 · 51 citations
Related papers
- UGPhysics: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Undergraduate Physics Reasoning with Large Language ModelsXin Xu, Qiyun Xu, Tong Xiao, Tianhao Chen et al.ICML 2025
- HiPhO: How Far Are (M)LLMs from Humans in the Latest High School Physics Olympiad Benchmark?Fangchen Yu, Haiyuan Wan, Qianjia Cheng, Yuchen Zhang et al.ICML 2026
- DeepPhy: Benchmarking Agentic VLMs on Physical ReasoningXinrun Xu, Pi Bu, Ye Wang, Börje F. Karlsson et al.AAAI 2026 · 6 citations
- FormalScience: Scalable Human-in-the-Loop Autoformalisation of Science with Agentic Code Generation in LeanJordan Meadows, Lan Zhang, André FreitasACL 2026 · 3 citations
- MolecularIQ: Characterizing Chemical Reasoning Capabilities Through Symbolic Verification on Molecular GraphsChristoph Bartmann, Johannes Schimunek, Mykyta Ielanskyi, Philipp Seidl et al.ICLR 2026 · 5 citations
