Though LLMs are capable of generating plausible programs, it's challenging to interact with the LLMs further to revise the program, especially if the user's specific requirements are different from the initial proposal.

We investigate how large language models (LLMs) fail when operating as autonomous agents with tool-use capabilities. Using the Kamiwaza Agentic Merit Index (KAMI) v0.1 benchmark, we analyze 900 execution traces from three representative models - Granite 4 Small, Llama 4 Maverick, and DeepSeek V3.1 - across filesystem, text extraction, CSV analysis, and SQL scenarios. Rather than focusing on aggregate scores, we perform fine-grained, per-trial behavioral analysis to surface the strategies that enable successful multi-step tool execution and the recurrent failure modes that undermine reliability. Our findings show that model scale alone does not predict agentic robustness: Llama 4 Maverick (400B) performs only marginally better than Granite 4 Small (32B) in some uncertainty-driven tasks, while DeepSeek V3.1's superior reliability derives primarily from post-training reinforcement learning rather than architecture or size. Across models, we identify four recurring failure archetypes: premature action without grounding, over-helpfulness that substitutes missing entities, vulnerability to distractor-induced context pollution, and fragile execution under load. These patterns highlight the need for agentic evaluation methods that emphasize interactive grounding, recovery behavior, and environment-aware adaptation, suggesting that reliable enterprise deployment requires not just stronger models but deliberate training and design choices that reinforce verification, constraint discovery, and adherence to source-of-truth data.

Chart understanding is crucial for deploying multimodal large language models (MLLMs) in real-world scenarios such as analyzing scientific papers and technical reports. Unlike natural images, charts pair a structured visual layout (spatial property) with an underlying data representation (textual property) -- grasping both is essential for precise, fine-grained chart reasoning. Motivated by this observation, we propose START, the Spatial and T extual learning for chART understanding. Specifically, we introduce (i) chart-element grounding and (ii) chart-to-code generation to strengthen an MLLM's understanding of both chart visual layout and data details. T o facilitate spatial and textual learning, we propose the START-Dataset generated with a novel data-generation pipeline that first leverages an MLLM to translate real chart images into executable chart code, recovering the underlying data representation while preserving the visual distribution of real-world charts. W e then evolve the code with a Large Language Model (LLM) to ascertain the positions of chart elements that capture the chart's visual structure, addressing challenges that existing methods cannot handle. T o evaluate a model's ability to understand chart spatial structures, we propose the Chart Spatial understanding Benchmark (CS-Bench), filling a critical gap in comprehensive chart understanding evaluation. Leveraging spatial and textual learning, START delivers consistent gains across model sizes and benchmarks over the base models and surpasses prior state-of-the-art by a clear margin. Code, data and models will be publicly available.

Evaluating vision-language models (VLMs) in scientific domains like mathematics and physics poses unique challenges that go far beyond predicting final answers. These domains demand conceptual understanding, symbolic reasoning, and adherence to formal laws, requirements that most existing benchmarks fail to address. In particular, current datasets tend to be static, lacking intermediate reasoning steps, robustness to variations, or mechanisms for verifying scientific correctness. To address these limitations, we introduce PRiSM, a synthetic, fully dynamic, and multimodal benchmark for evaluating scientific reasoning via grounded Python code. PRiSM includes over 24,750 university-level physics and math problems, and it leverages our scalable agent-based pipeline, PrismAgent, to generate well-structured problem instances. Each problem contains dynamic textual and visual input, a generated figure, alongside rich structured outputs: executable Python code for ground truth generation and verification, and detailed step-by-step reasoning. The dynamic nature and Python-powered automated ground truth generation of our benchmark allow for fine-grained experimental auditing of multimodal VLMs, revealing failure modes, uncertainty behaviors, and limitations in scientific reasoning. To this end, we propose five targeted evaluation tasks covering generalization, symbolic program synthesis, perturbation robustness, reasoning correction, and ambiguity resolution. Through comprehensive evaluation of existing VLMs, we highlight their limitations and showcase how PRiSM enables deeper insights into their scientific reasoning capabilities.

We introduce, a large-scale synthetic benchmark of 15,045 university-level physics problems (90/10% train/test split). Each problem is fully parameterized, supporting an effectively infinite range of input configurations, and is accompanied by structured, step-by-step reasoning and executable Python code that produces the ground-truth solution for any parameter set. The benchmark contains three question types: MC-Symbolic (multiple-choice with symbolic options), MC-Numerical (multiple-choice with numerical options), and free-form (open-ended responses). These diverse formats test complementary reasoning skills. By leveraging the dynamic, code-driven nature of the benchmark, we introduce three novel evaluation metrics in addition to standard accuracy: Consistency Score, Failure Rate, and Confusion Rate, that quantify variability and uncertainty across problem variants. Experiments with state-of-the-art instruction-tuned language models reveal both strengths and limitations in scientific reasoning, positioning SymPyBench as a foundation for developing more robust and interpretable reasoning systems

Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) achieve strong performance on complex reasoning tasks by generating long Chains of Thought (CoTs). However, this paradigm might incur substantial token overhead, especially when models "overthink" by producing lengthy reasoning chains, which can even lead to incorrect answers. A promising direction is the symbolic-solver-integrated approach, which leverages the code generation capabilities of LLMs to translate reasoning tasks into executable code and then solve them with a symbolic solver. In this paper, we explore an open question of when the conventional long-CoT can be enhanced by symbolic solvers. Our experimental results show that the symbolic-solver-integrated method only helps when the problem requires limited implicit reasoning but involves an ample search space. The latest LLMs, like GPT-4o, show better performance on deductive problems with shallow reasoning depth, while the symbolic-solver-integrated method significantly improves the LLMs' performance in constraint satisfaction problems that require repeated backtracks. When a declarative exemplar is provided, even CodeLlama-13B can outperform GPT-4o in difficult Zebra puzzles.

Large Language Models (LLMs), such as GPT-4 and DeepSeek, have been applied to a wide range of domains in software engineering. However, their potential in the context of High-Performance Computing (HPC) much remains to be explored. This paper evaluates how well DeepSeek, a recent LLM, performs in generating a set of HPC benchmark codes: a conjugate gradient solver, the parallel heat equation, parallel matrix multiplication, DGEMM, and the STREAM triad operation. We analyze DeepSeek's code generation capabilities for traditional HPC languages like Cpp, Fortran, Julia and Python. The evaluation includes testing for code correctness, performance, and scaling across different configurations and matrix sizes. We also provide a detailed comparison between DeepSeek and another widely used tool: GPT-4. Our results demonstrate that while DeepSeek generates functional code for HPC tasks, it lags behind GPT-4, in terms of scalability and execution efficiency of the generated code.

The application of machine learning (ML) methods, a subfield of artificial intelligence (AI), to the solution of electromagnetic boundary value problems (BVPs) is currently a highly active area of research. Deep neural networks such as neural operators (Kovachki et al. 2023) and physics-informed neural networks, in which information about the BVP (and possibly measurement data) is integrated into the loss function of the network, often aim to replace traditional numerical methods such as the finite element (FE) method, compare, for example, with (Guo et al. 2025; Rezende and Schuhmann 2025). This work addresses an orthogonal problem: How can AI methods be used to reduce the time required to set up electromagnetic simulation models, rather than solving the numerical models themselves? The focus is thus on the assisted generation of simulation models, whereby the numerical scheme itself remains unaffected. A conceptually related direction has recently emerged in the computational fluid dynamics (CFD) community.

In this work, we alleviate this gap.

Large language models (LLMs) achieve superhuman performance on complex reasoning tasks, yet often fail on much simpler problems, raising concerns about their reliability and interpretability. We investigate this paradox through a focused study with two key design features: simplicity, to expose basic failure modes, and scale, to enable comprehensive controlled experiments. We focus on set membership queries -- among the most fundamental forms of reasoning -- using tasks like ``Is apple an element of the set \{pear, plum, apple, raspberry\}?''. We conduct a systematic empirical evaluation across prompt phrasing, semantic structure, element ordering, and model choice. Our large-scale analysis reveals that LLM performance on this elementary task is consistently brittle, and unpredictable across all dimensions, suggesting that the models' ``understanding'' of the set concept is fragmented and convoluted at best. Our work demonstrates that the large-scale experiments enabled by the simplicity of the problem allow us to map and analyze the failure modes comprehensively, making this approach a valuable methodology for LLM evaluation in general.