Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper introduces a perturbation pipeline of 14 techniques to evaluate the robustness of LLM reasoning on the AIME 2024 dataset, testing 8 state-of-the-art models. The study reveals that while frontier models show resilience, open-weight models experience significant accuracy drops (up to 55%) under perturbation, indicating structural fragility. Furthermore, by sequentially presenting multiple unperturbed math problems, the authors demonstrate that open-weight models and even Claude Opus 4.6 suffer accuracy decay, suggesting that intermediate reasoning steps negatively impact subsequent reasoning due to limitations of standard dense attention.
Open-weight LLMs can completely fail at reasoning tasks with even minor input perturbations, revealing a surprising brittleness despite their apparent capabilities.
While Large Language Models (LLMs) achieve high performance on standard mathematical benchmarks, their underlying reasoning processes remain highly overfit to standard textual formatting. We propose a perturbation pipeline consisting of 14 techniques to evaluate robustness of LLM reasoning. We apply this pipeline to AIME 2024 dataset and evalute 8 state-of-the-art models on the resulting benchmark. While frontier models exhibit resilience, open weights reasoning models suffer catastrophic collapses (up to 55% average accuracy drops across perturbations and up to 100% on some), exposing structural fragility. To further disentangle mechanical parsing failures from downstream reasoning failures, we strictly isolate the models' working memory capacity by forcing models to solve multiple unperturbed mathematical problems sequentially within a single context window. Our results indicate that open weight models ranging from 7B to 120B parameters and Claude Opus 4.6 exhibit accuracy decay on subsequent problems. This degradation demonstrates that intermediate reasoning steps permanently pollute standard dense attention mechanisms. We argue that to achieve reliable reasoning, future reasoning architectures must integrate explicit contextual resets within a model's own Chain-of-Thought, leading to fundamental open questions regarding the optimal granularity of atomic reasoning tasks.