Putnam-AXIOM: A Functional & Static Benchmark for Measuring Higher Level Mathematical Reasoning in LLMs
Aryan Gulati, Brando Miranda, Eric Chen, Emily Xia, Kai Fronsdal, Bruno de Moraes Dumont, Sanmi Koyejo
Abstract
Current mathematical reasoning benchmarks for large language models (LLMs) are approaching saturation, with some achieving > 90% accuracy, and are increasingly compromised by training-set contamination. We introduce Putnam-AXIOM, a benchmark of 522 university-level competition problems drawn from the prestigious William Lowell Putnam Mathematical Competition, and Putnam-AXIOM Variation, an unseen companion set of 100 functional variants generated by programmatically perturbing variables, and constants. The variation protocol produces an unlimited stream of equally difficult, unseen instances -yielding a contamination-resilient test bed. On the Original set, OpenAI's o1-preview -the strongest evaluated model -scores 41.9%, but its accuracy drops by 19.6 % (46.8% relative decrease) on the paired Variations. The remaining eighteen models show the same downward trend, ten of them with non-overlapping 95% confidence intervals. These gaps suggest memorization and highlight the necessity of dynamic benchmarks. We complement ("boxed") accuracy with Teacher-Forced Accuracy (TFA), a lightweight metric that directly scores reasoning traces and automates natural language proof evaluations. Putnam-AXIOM therefore provides a rigorous, contamination-resilient evaluation framework for assessing advanced mathematical reasoning of LLMs. Data and evaluation code are publicly available at https://github.com/ brando90/putnam-axiom .
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 papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on9
- Measuring Massive Multitask Language UnderstandingDan Hendrycks, Collin Burns, Steven Basart, Andy Zou et al.ICLR 2021 · 7,905 citations
- Let's Verify Step by StepHunter Lightman, Vineet Kosaraju, Yuri Burda, Harrison Edwards et al.ICLR 2024 · 3,045 citations
- Generative Agents: Interactive Simulacra of Human BehaviorJoon Sung Park, Joseph C. O'Brien, Carrie Jun Cai, Meredith Ringel Morris et al.UIST 2023 · 1,882 citations
- Large Language Models Cannot Self-Correct Reasoning YetJie Huang, Xinyun Chen, Swaroop Mishra, Huaixiu Steven Zheng et al.ICLR 2024 · 858 citations
- Compression, Transduction, and Creation: A Unified Framework for Evaluating Natural Language GenerationMingkai Deng, Bowen Tan, Zhengzhong Liu, Eric P. Xing et al.EMNLP 2021 · 49 citations
Related papers
- UGMathBench: A Diverse and Dynamic Benchmark for Undergraduate-Level Mathematical Reasoning with Large Language ModelsXin Xu, Jiaxin Zhang, Tianhao Chen, Zitong Chao et al.ICLR 2025
- Omni-MATH: A Universal Olympiad Level Mathematic Benchmark for Large Language ModelsBofei Gao, Feifan Song, Zhe Yang, Zefan Cai et al.ICLR 2025 · 3 citations
- JudgeBoard: Benchmarking and Enhancing Small Language Models for Reasoning EvaluationZhenyu Bi, Gaurav Srivastava, Yang Li, Swastik Roy et al.AAAI 2026
- One Example Shown, Many Concepts Known! Counterexample-Driven Conceptual Reasoning in Mathematical LLMsYinghui Li, Jiayi Kuang, Haojing Huang, Zhikun Xu et al.ICML 2025
- BeyondBench: Contamination-Resistant Evaluation of Reasoning in Language ModelsGaurav Srivastava, Aafiya Hussain, Zhenyu Bi, Swastik Roy et al.ICLR 2026 · 4 citations
