ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2025
Evaluating LLMs on Kazakhstan's mathematics exam for university admission.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Generation of Kazakhstan's unified national testing variants using AI: a platform for automatic task creation with expert control.Frontiers in big data · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs) has prompted their exploration in educational contexts, particularly in high-stakes standardized tests such as Kazakhstan's Unified National Testing (UNT) mathematics component, which is critical for university admission. While most existing benchmarks for mathematical reasoning focus on English, concerns remain that LLMs may underperform in under-resourced or non-English languages. This study addresses this gap by evaluating LLM performance on 139 UNT multiple-choice mathematics questions administered entirely in Russian. Methods: We assessed six LLMs-Claude, DeepSeek, Gemini, Llama, Qwen, and o1-on questions covering algebra, functions, geometry, inequalities, and trigonometry. Three evaluation conditions were employed: (1) zero-shot performance, (2) hybrid integration with SymPy for symbolic computation, and (3) a role-specific simulated multi-agent refinement framework that builds on existing self-correction techniques with targeted feedback. Results: In zero-shot settings, DeepSeek, Gemini, Qwen, and o1 achieved near-perfect or perfect accuracy (91.2-100%) across all difficulty levels and topics, while Claude and Llama lagged (43.5-76.5%). The hybrid approach significantly improved Claude and Llama's accuracy by 27.4% and 39.9%, respectively. Under the multi-agent refinement condition, Claude showed substantial gains, reaching 97.8% accuracy, which represented a 58.1% improvement over zero-shot performance. Discussion: These findings provide important empirical evidence that LLMs can perform competitively on mathematics tasks in non-English languages. The results challenge prior assumptions about limited performance in under-resourced linguistic settings and highlight the potential of LLMs to support bilingual education and promote equitable access to higher education.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.