The DOI matches its DataCite record.
AceMath: Advancing Frontier Math Reasoning with Post-Training and Reward Modeling
Open accessAbstract
In this paper, we introduce AceMath, a suite of frontier math models that excel in solving complex math problems, along with highly effective reward models capable of evaluating generated solutions and reliably identifying the correct ones. To develop the instruction-tuned math models, we propose a supervised fine-tuning (SFT) process that first achieves competitive performance across general domains, followed by targeted fine-tuning for the math domain using a carefully curated set of prompts and synthetically generated responses. The resulting model, AceMath-72B-Instruct greatly outperforms Qwen2.5-Math-72B-Instruct, GPT-4o and Claude-3.5 Sonnet. To develop math-specialized reward model, we first construct AceMath-RewardBench, a comprehensive and robust benchmark for evaluating math reward models across diverse problems and difficulty levels. After that, we present a systematic approach to build our math reward models. The resulting model, AceMath-72B-RM, consistently outperforms state-of-the-art reward models. Furthermore, when combining AceMath-72B-Instruct with AceMath-72B-RM, we achieve the highest average rm@8 score across the math reasoning benchmarks. We release model weights, training data, and evaluation benchmarks at: https://research.nvidia.com/labs/adlr/acemath
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Existing studies primarily focus on reasoning tasks related to coding, mathematics, and STEM fields, even within multimodal reasoning settings.
“However, existing studies primarily focus on reasoning tasks related to coding, mathematics, and STEM fields (Liu et al., 2024), even within multimodal reasoning settings (Qwen-Team, 2024).”
From Cosmos-Reason1: From Physical Common Sense To Embodied Reasoning (2025) · cites this paper as Liu et al., 2024
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Cosmos-Reason1: From Physical Common Sense To Embodied Reasoning
NVIDIA, :, Azzolini, A., Bai, J., Brandon, H., Cao, J., Chattopadhyay, P., Chen, H., Chu, J., Cui, Y., et al. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.15558 · Cited by 187
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Liu, Z., Chen, Y., Shoeybi, M., Catanzaro, B., & Ping, W.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2024
- Pages
- 3993-4015
- arXiv
- 2412.15084
- OpenAlex
- W4412888745
- Cited by
- 5
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 2
- FWCI
- 4.74
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL (Findings of ACL) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Mathematics, Computing, and Information Processing
- Social Sciences › Education › Mathematics Education and Pedagogy
- Keywords
- mathematical reasoning, large language models, reward models, instruction tuning, supervised fine-tuning, synthetic training data, mathematical problem solving
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review