Arrow Research search

Author name cluster

Iman Mirzadeh

Possible papers associated with this exact author name in Arrow. This page groups case-insensitive exact name matches and is not a full identity disambiguation profile.

3 papers
2 author rows

Possible papers

3

ICLR Conference 2025 Conference Paper

GSM-Symbolic: Understanding the Limitations of Mathematical Reasoning in Large Language Models

  • Iman Mirzadeh
  • Keivan Alizadeh
  • Hooman Shahrokhi
  • Oncel Tuzel
  • Samy Bengio
  • Mehrdad Farajtabar

Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have sparked interest in their mathematical reasoning capabilities. While performance on the widely popular GSM8K benchmark has improved, questions remain about whether reported evaluation metrics are reliable, and reasoning abilities of LLMs have advanced. To overcome the limitations of existing evaluations, we introduce GSM-Symbolic, an improved benchmark created from symbolic templates that allow for the generation of a diverse set of questions. GSM-Symbolic enables more controllable evaluations, providing key insights and more reliable metrics for measuring the reasoning capabilities of models. Our findings reveal that LLMs exhibit noticeable variance when responding to different instantiations of the same question. Specifically, the performance of models declines when only the numerical values in the question are altered in the GSM-Symbolic benchmark. Furthermore, we investigate the fragility of mathematical reasoning in these models and demonstrate that their performance significantly deteriorates as the number of clauses in a question increases. We hypothesize that this decline is due to the fact that current LLMs are not capable of genuine logical reasoning; instead, they attempt to replicate the reasoning steps observed in their training data. When we add a single clause that appears relevant to the question, we observe significant performance drops (up to 65%) across all state-of-the-art models, even though the added clause does not contribute to the reasoning chain needed to reach the final answer. Overall, our work provides a more nuanced understanding of LLMs' capabilities and limitations in mathematical reasoning.

NeurIPS Conference 2025 Conference Paper

The Illusion of Thinking: Understanding the Strengths and Limitations of Reasoning Models via the Lens of Problem Complexity

  • Parshin Shojaee
  • Iman Mirzadeh
  • Keivan Alizadeh vahid
  • Maxwell Horton
  • Samy Bengio
  • Mehrdad Farajtabar

Recent generations of frontier language models have introduced Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) that generate detailed thinking processes before providing answers. While these models demonstrate improved performance on reasoning benchmarks, their fundamental capabilities, scaling properties, and limitations remain insufficiently understood. Current evaluations primarily focus on established mathematical and coding benchmarks, emphasizing final answer accuracy. However, this evaluation paradigm often suffers from data contamination and does not provide insights into the reasoning traces' structure and quality. In this work, we systematically investigate these gaps with the help of controllable puzzle environments that allow precise manipulation of compositional complexity while maintaining consistent logical structures. This setup enables the analysis of not only final answers but also the internal reasoning traces, offering insights into how LRMs ``think''. Through extensive experimentation across diverse puzzles, we show that frontier LRMs face a complete accuracy collapse beyond certain complexities. Moreover, they exhibit a counterintuitive scaling limit: their reasoning effort increases with problem complexity up to a point, then declines despite having an adequate token budget. By comparing LRMs with their standard LLM counterparts under equivalent inference compute, we identify three performance regimes: (1) low-complexity tasks where standard models surprisingly outperform LRMs, (2) medium-complexity tasks where additional thinking in LRMs demonstrates advantage, and (3) high-complexity tasks where both models experience complete collapse. We found that LRMs have limitations in exact computation: they fail to use explicit algorithms and reason inconsistently across scales and problems. We also investigate the reasoning traces in more depth, studying the patterns of explored solutions and analyzing the models' computational behavior, shedding light on their strengths, limitations, and ultimately raising questions about the nature for their reasoning capabilities.

ICLR Conference 2024 Conference Paper

ReLU Strikes Back: Exploiting Activation Sparsity in Large Language Models

  • Iman Mirzadeh
  • Keivan Alizadeh
  • Sachin Mehta
  • Carlo C. del Mundo
  • Oncel Tuzel
  • Golnoosh Samei
  • Mohammad Rastegari
  • Mehrdad Farajtabar

Large Language Models (LLMs) with billions of parameters have drastically transformed AI applications. However, their demanding computation during inference has raised significant challenges for deployment on resource-constrained devices. Despite recent trends favoring alternative activation functions such as GELU or SiLU, known for increased computation, this study strongly advocates for reinstating ReLU activation in LLMs. We demonstrate that using the ReLU activation function has a negligible impact on convergence and performance while significantly reducing computation and weight transfer. This reduction is particularly valuable during the memory-bound inference step, where efficiency is paramount. Exploring sparsity patterns in ReLU-based LLMs, we unveil the reutilization of activated neurons for generating new tokens and leveraging these insights, we propose practical strategies to substantially reduce LLM inference computation up to three times, using ReLU activations with minimal performance trade-offs.

v2026.09.13