Skip to content
← Back to explorer

AgentCoMa: A Compositional Benchmark Mixing Commonsense and Mathematical Reasoning in Real-World Scenarios

Lisa Alazraki, Lihu Chen, Ana Brassard, Joe Stacey, Hossein A. Rahmani, Marek Rei · Aug 27, 2025 · Citations: 0

How to use this page

Low trust

Use this as background context only. Do not make protocol decisions from this page alone.

Best use

Background context only

What to verify

Validate the evaluation procedure and quality controls in the full paper before operational use.

Evidence quality

Low

Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.

Abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved high accuracy on complex commonsense and mathematical problems that involve the composition of multiple reasoning steps. However, current compositional benchmarks testing these skills tend to focus on either commonsense or math reasoning, whereas LLM agents solving real-world tasks would require a combination of both. In this work, we introduce an Agentic Commonsense and Math benchmark (AgentCoMa), where each compositional task requires a commonsense reasoning step and a math reasoning step. We test it on 61 LLMs of different sizes, model families, and training strategies. We find that LLMs can usually solve both steps in isolation, yet their accuracy drops by ~30% on average when the two are combined. This is a substantially greater performance gap than the one we observe in prior compositional benchmarks that combine multiple steps of the same reasoning type. In contrast, non-expert human annotators can solve the compositional questions and the individual steps in AgentCoMa with similarly high accuracy. Furthermore, we conduct a series of interpretability studies to better understand the performance gap, examining neuron patterns, attention maps and membership inference. Our work underscores a substantial degree of model brittleness in the context of mixed-type compositional reasoning and offers a test bed for future improvement.

Abstract-only analysis — low confidence

All signals on this page are inferred from the abstract only and may be inaccurate. Do not use this page as a primary protocol reference.

  • This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.
  • The available metadata is too thin to trust this as a primary source.

Should You Rely On This Paper?

This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

A benchmark-and-metrics comparison anchor.

Main weakness

This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.

Trust level

Low

Usefulness score

5/100 • Low

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

Human Feedback Signal

Not explicit in abstract metadata

Evaluation Signal

Detected

Usefulness for eval research

Adjacent candidate

Extraction confidence 45%

What We Could Verify

These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.

Human Feedback Types

missing

None explicit

No explicit feedback protocol extracted.

"Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved high accuracy on complex commonsense and mathematical problems that involve the composition of multiple reasoning steps."

Evaluation Modes

partial

Automatic Metrics

Includes extracted eval setup.

"Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved high accuracy on complex commonsense and mathematical problems that involve the composition of multiple reasoning steps."

Quality Controls

missing

Not reported

No explicit QC controls found.

"Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved high accuracy on complex commonsense and mathematical problems that involve the composition of multiple reasoning steps."

Benchmarks / Datasets

partial

MATH

Useful for quick benchmark comparison.

"Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved high accuracy on complex commonsense and mathematical problems that involve the composition of multiple reasoning steps."

Reported Metrics

partial

Accuracy

Useful for evaluation criteria comparison.

"Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved high accuracy on complex commonsense and mathematical problems that involve the composition of multiple reasoning steps."

Rater Population

partial

Mixed

Helpful for staffing comparability.

"In contrast, non-expert human annotators can solve the compositional questions and the individual steps in AgentCoMa with similarly high accuracy."

Human Feedback Details

  • Uses human feedback: No
  • Feedback types: None
  • Rater population: Mixed
  • Expertise required: Math

Evaluation Details

  • Evaluation modes: Automatic Metrics
  • Agentic eval: None
  • Quality controls: Not reported
  • Evidence quality: Low
  • Use this page as: Background context only

Protocol And Measurement Signals

Benchmarks / Datasets

MATH

Reported Metrics

accuracy

Research Brief

Metadata summary

Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved high accuracy on complex commonsense and mathematical problems that involve the composition of multiple reasoning steps.

Based on abstract + metadata only. Check the source paper before making high-confidence protocol decisions.

Key Takeaways

  • Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved high accuracy on complex commonsense and mathematical problems that involve the composition of multiple reasoning steps.
  • However, current compositional benchmarks testing these skills tend to focus on either commonsense or math reasoning, whereas LLM agents solving real-world tasks would require a combination of both.
  • In this work, we introduce an Agentic Commonsense and Math benchmark (AgentCoMa), where each compositional task requires a commonsense reasoning step and a math reasoning step.

Researcher Actions

  • Compare this paper against others mentioning MATH.
  • Validate inferred eval signals (Automatic metrics) against the full paper.
  • Use related-paper links to find stronger protocol-specific references.

Caveats

  • Generated from abstract + metadata only; no PDF parsing.
  • Signals below are heuristic and may miss details reported outside the abstract.

Research Summary

Contribution Summary

  • However, current compositional benchmarks testing these skills tend to focus on either commonsense or math reasoning, whereas LLM agents solving real-world tasks would require a combination of both.
  • In this work, we introduce an Agentic Commonsense and Math benchmark (AgentCoMa), where each compositional task requires a commonsense reasoning step and a math reasoning step.
  • In contrast, non-expert human annotators can solve the compositional questions and the individual steps in AgentCoMa with similarly high accuracy.

Why It Matters For Eval

  • In this work, we introduce an Agentic Commonsense and Math benchmark (AgentCoMa), where each compositional task requires a commonsense reasoning step and a math reasoning step.
  • In contrast, non-expert human annotators can solve the compositional questions and the individual steps in AgentCoMa with similarly high accuracy.

Researcher Checklist

  • Gap: Human feedback protocol is explicit

    No explicit human feedback protocol detected.

  • Pass: Evaluation mode is explicit

    Detected: Automatic Metrics

  • Gap: Quality control reporting appears

    No calibration/adjudication/IAA control explicitly detected.

  • Pass: Benchmark or dataset anchors are present

    Detected: MATH

  • Pass: Metric reporting is present

    Detected: accuracy

Related Papers

Papers are ranked by protocol overlap, extraction signal alignment, and semantic proximity.

Get Started

Join the #1 Platform for AI Training Talent

Where top AI builders and expert AI Trainers connect to build the future of AI.
Self-Service
Post a Job
Post your project and get a shortlist of qualified AI Trainers and Data Labelers. Hire and manage your team in the tools you already use.
Managed Service
For Large Projects
Done-for-You
We recruit, onboard, and manage a dedicated team inside your tools. End-to-end operations for large or complex projects.
For Freelancers
Join as an AI Trainer
Find AI training and data labeling projects across platforms, all in one place. One profile, one application process, more opportunities.