Can large language models correctly interpret equations with errors?

This paper explores the potential of large language models to accurately extract and translate equations from typed student responses into a standard format. This is a useful task as standardized equations can be graded reliably using a computer algebra system or a satisfiability modulo theories solver. Therefore physics instructors interested in automated grading would not need to rely on the mathematical reasoning capabilities of language models. We used two novel frameworks to improve the translations. The first is consensus where a pair of models verify the correctness of the translations. The second is a neurosymbolic LLM-modulo approach were models receive feedback from an automated reasoning tool. We performed experiments using responses to the Australian Physics Olympiad exam. We report on results, finding that no open-source model was able to translate the student responses at the desired level of accuracy. Future work could involve breaking the task into smaller components before parsing to improve performance or generalizing the experiments to translate hand-written responses.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Physical Review Physics Education Research
Published
2025-11-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1103/v8f8-s11v
Primary Topic
Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Can large language models correctly interpret equations with errors?

Karl J. Friston
Physical Review Physics Education Research
Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
article

Can large language models correctly interpret equations with errors?

Karl J. Friston
article en

Abstract

This paper explores the potential of large language models to accurately extract and translate equations from typed student responses into a standard format. This is a useful task as standardized equations can be graded reliably using a computer algebra system or a satisfiability modulo theories solver. Therefore physics instructors interested in automated grading would not need to rely on the mathematical reasoning capabilities of language models. We used two novel frameworks to improve the translations. The first is consensus where a pair of models verify the correctness of the translations. The second is a neurosymbolic LLM-modulo approach were models receive feedback from an automated reasoning tool. We performed experiments using responses to the Australian Physics Olympiad exam. We report on results, finding that no open-source model was able to translate the student responses at the desired level of accuracy. Future work could involve breaking the task into smaller components before parsing to improve performance or generalizing the experiments to translate hand-written responses.

Physical Review Physics Education ResearchVol. 21(2)
Australian National University (AU), Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (AU), Health Sciences and Nutrition (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 79%
Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Can large language models correctly interpret equations with errors? — Karl J. Friston · Physical Review Physics Education Research (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS