Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Research

aiqbench analysis

This study reveals a critical gap between current large language models and human cognition, demonstrating that LLMs fail to maintain coherent knowledge dependencies in mathematical reasoning despite high accuracy. The findings indicate that existing evaluation metrics, such as standard accuracy scores or LLM-as-judge methods, are insufficient for detecting these structural deficiencies in model behavior. For researchers focused on interpretability and robust reasoning, this underscores the urgent need for frameworks like Knowledge Space Theory to better align artificial intelligence with principled human-like learning structures.
Sources coveringarXiv, AI Alignment Forum, LessWrong
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Do LLMs Exhibit Coherent Knowledge Structures in Mathematical Reasoning? A Perspective from Knowledge Space Theory

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2609.05245v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Human knowledge is inherently structured and interdependent: mastery of a concept requires prior mastery of its prerequisites, a principle formalized by Knowledge Space Theory (KST). While LLMs achieve strong performance on complex reasoning tasks, it remains unclear whether they exhibit coherent, human-like knowledge structure. We introduce a KST-grounded framework for evaluating LLM knowledge structure in mathematical reasoning, using it as a normative framework to analyze whether LLM behavior adheres to principled knowledge dependencies. Evaluating eight open- and closed-source LLMs against real human learners, we find that (1) LLMs do not adhere to human knowledge structure -- they frequently violate knowledge dependencies and fail to leverage related knowledge provided in context to improve performance on dependent questions; (2) LLMs do not share a consistent knowledge structure among themselves, as reflected by low overlap in their knowledge distributions. Furthermore, these structural deficiencies remain largely invisible to accuracy-based and LLM-as-judge evaluations. Together, our results provide behavioral evidence that current LLMs knowledge does not follow a human-like structure.

Title:Do LLMs Exhibit Coherent Knowledge Structures in Mathematical Reasoning? A Perspective from Knowledge Space Theory

Abstract:Human knowledge is inherently structured and interdependent: mastery of a concept requires prior mastery of its prerequisites, a principle formalized by Knowledge Space Theory (KST). While LLMs achieve strong performance on complex reasoning tasks, it remains unclear whether they exhibit coherent, human-like knowledge structure. We introduce a KST-grounded framework for evaluating LLM knowledge structure in mathematical reasoning, using it as a normative framework to analyze whether LLM behavior adheres to principled knowledge dependencies. Evaluating eight open- and closed-source LLMs against real human learners, we find that (1) LLMs do not adhere to human knowledge structure -- they frequently violate knowledge dependencies and fail to leverage related knowledge provided in context to improve performance on dependent questions; (2) LLMs do not share a consistent knowledge structure among themselves, as reflected by low overlap in their knowledge distributions. Furthermore, these structural deficiencies remain largely invisible to accuracy-based and LLM-as-judge evaluations. Together, our results provide behavioral evidence that current LLMs knowledge does not follow a human-like structure.

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)

arXiv:2609.05245 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2609.05245v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.05245 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 273 words

Related coverage