Math reasoning has been one crucial ability of large language models (LLMs), where significant advancements have been achieved in recent years. However, most efforts focus on LLMs by curating high-quality annotation data and intricate training (or inference) paradigms, while the math reasoning performance of multimodal LLMs (MLLMs) remains lagging behind. Since the MLLM typically consists of an LLM and a vision block, we wonder: Can MLLMs directly absorb math reasoning abilities from off-the-shelf math LLMs without tuning? Recent model-merging approaches may offer insights into this question. However, they overlook the alignment between the MLLM and LLM, where we find that there is a large gap between their parameter spaces, resulting in lower performance. Our empirical evidence reveals two key factors behind this issue: the identification of crucial reasoning-associated layers in the model and the mitigation of the gaps in parameter space. Based on the empirical insights, we propose IP-Merging that first Identifies the reasoning-associated parameters in both MLLM and Math LLM, then Projects them into the subspace of MLLM, aiming to maintain the alignment, and finally merges parameters in this subspace. IP-Merging is a tuning-free approach since parameters are directly adjusted. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our IP-Merging method can enhance the math reasoning ability of MLLMs directly from Math LLMs without compromising their other capabilities.

Math reasoning has been one crucial ability of large language models (LLMs), where significant advancements have been achieved in recent years. However, most efforts focus on LLMs by curating high-quality annotation data and intricate training (or inference) paradigms, while the math reasoning performance of multi-modal LLMs (MLLMs) remains lagging behind. Since the MLLM typically consists of an LLM and vision block, we wonder: \textit{Can MLLMs directly absorb math reasoning abilities from off-the-shelf math LLMs without tuning?} Recent model-merging approaches may offer insights into this question. However, they overlook the alignment between the MLLM and LLM, where we find that there is a large gap between their parameter spaces, resulting in lower performance. Our empirical evidence reveals two key factors behind this issue: the identification of crucial reasoning-associated layers in the model and the mitigation of the gaps in parameter space. Based on the empirical insights, we propose \textbf{IP-Merging} that first \textbf{I}dentifies the reasoning-associated parameters in both MLLM and Math LLM, then \textbf{P}rojects them into the subspace of MLLM aiming to maintain the alignment, finally merges parameters in this subspace. IP-Merging is a tuning-free approach since parameters are directly adjusted. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our IP-Merging method can enhance the math reasoning ability of MLLMs directly from Math LLMs without compromising their other capabilities.

Math reasoning has been one crucial ability of large language models (LLMs), where significant advancements have been achieved in recent years. However, most efforts focus on LLMs by curating high-quality annotation data and intricate training (or inference) paradigms, while the math reasoning performance of multi-modal LLMs (MLLMs) remains lagging behind. Since the MLLM typically consists of an LLM and a vision block, we wonder: Can MLLMs directly absorb math reasoning abilities from off-the-shelf math LLMs without tuning? Recent model-merging approaches may offer insights into this question. However, they overlook the alignment between the MLLM and LLM, where we find that there is a large gap between their parameter spaces, resulting in lower performance. Our empirical evidence reveals two key factors behind this issue: the identification of crucial reasoning-associated layers in the model and the mitigation of the gaps in parameter space. Based on the empirical insights, we propose IP-Merging that first identifies the reasoning-associated parameters in both MLLM and Math LLM, then projects them into the subspace of MLLM, aiming to maintain the alignment, and finally merges parameters in this subspace. IP-Merging is a tuning-free approach since parameters are directly adjusted. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our IP-Merging method can enhance the math reasoning ability of MLLMs directly from Math LLMs without compromising their other capabilities.

Large language models have demonstrated impressive performance on challenging mathematical reasoning tasks, which has triggered the discussion of whether the performance is achieved by true reasoning capability or memorization. To investigate this question, prior work has constructed mathematical benchmarks when questions undergo simple perturbations -- modifications that still preserve the underlying reasoning patterns of the solutions. However, no work has explored hard perturbations, which fundamentally change the nature of the problem so that the original solution steps do not apply. To bridge the gap, we construct MATH-P-Simple and MATH-P-Hard via simple perturbation and hard perturbation, respectively. Each consists of 279 perturbed math problems derived from level-5 (hardest) problems in the MATH dataset (Hendrycksmath et. al., 2021). We observe significant performance drops on MATH-P-Hard across various models, including o1-mini (-16.49%) and gemini-2.0-flash-thinking (-12.9%). We also raise concerns about a novel form of memorization where models blindly apply learned problem-solving skills without assessing their applicability to modified contexts. This issue is amplified when using original problems for in-context learning. We call for research efforts to address this challenge, which is critical for developing more robust and reliable reasoning models.

We propose novel evaluations for mathematical reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) based on mathematical misconceptions. Our primary approach is to simulate LLMs as a novice learner and an expert tutor, aiming to identify the incorrect answer to math question resulted from a specific misconception and to recognize the misconception(s) behind an incorrect answer, respectively. Contrary to traditional LLMs-based mathematical evaluations that focus on answering math questions correctly, our approach takes inspirations from principles in educational learning sciences. We explicitly ask LLMs to mimic a novice learner by answering questions in a specific incorrect manner based on incomplete knowledge; and to mimic an expert tutor by identifying misconception(s) corresponding to an incorrect answer to a question. Using simple grade-school math problems, our experiments reveal that, while LLMs can easily answer these questions correctly, they struggle to identify 1) the incorrect answer corresponding to specific incomplete knowledge (misconceptions); 2) the misconceptions that explain particular incorrect answers. Our study indicates new opportunities for enhancing LLMs' math reasoning capabilities, especially on developing robust student simulation and expert tutoring models in the educational applications such as intelligent tutoring systems.