cs.CLApr 25, 2026

Evaluating Large Language Models on Computer Science University Exams in Data Structures

Authors: Edan GabayYael MaozJonathan StahlNaama MaozAbdo AmerOrr EilatHanoch LevyMichal Kleinbort+2 more

Organizations: Blavatnik School of Computer Science and AI

Abstract

We present a comprehensive evaluation of Large Language Models (LLMs) on Computer Science (CS) Data Structure examination questions. Our work introduces a new benchmark dataset comprising exam questions from Tel Aviv University (TAU), curated to assess LLMs' abilities in handling closed and multiple-choice questions. We evaluated the performance of OpenAI's GPT 4o and Anthropic's Claude 3.5, popular LLMs, alongside two smaller LLMs, Mathstral 7B and LLaMA 3 8B, across the TAU exams benchmark. Our findings provide insight into the current capabilities of LLMs in CS education.

Explore similar work

Aug 20, 2026cs.CL

FormalTCS: Benchmarking End-to-End Frontier Formal Theoretical Computer Science Research of Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) have shown growing potential for automated theoretical computer science (TCS) research, yet existing benchmarks remain far from realistic research settings. We introduce \ourbenchmark, an expert-validated benchmark for evaluating LLMs on frontier, end-to-end TCS research. \ourbenchmark contains 143143 instances drawn from papers accepted to STOC, FOCS, SODA, and COLT in 2025-2026, preserving paper-specific definitions, assumptions, and proof dependencies, with expert-verified Lean formalizations and proofs. Evaluations of leading LLMs reveal that current models remain far from reliably completing the full research pipeline. In particular, autoformalization is the sharpest bottleneck: the best model achieves only 11.511.5 on translating natural-language claims into formal theorem statements, compared with 28.628.6 Pass@8 when proving human-provided formal statements. Building on \ourbenchmark, we further develop an automated TCS research framework that generates, formalizes, filters, and proves new claims. Of 6464 generated claims, only 66 ultimately pass expert evaluation and proof verification, indicating that beyond formalization, limited research taste remains another major barrier to autonomous TCS research.
Dingzirui Wang, Xuanliang Zhang, Keyan Xu +2
May 11, 2026cs.CL

Can Language Models Analyze Data? Evaluating Large Language Models for Question Answering over Datasets

This paper investigates the effectiveness of large language models (LLMs) in answering questions over datasets. We examine their performance in two scenarios: (a) directly answering questions given a dataset file as input, and (b) generating SQL queries to answer questions given the schema of a relational database. We also evaluate the impact of different prompting strategies on model performance. The study includes both state-of-the-art LLMs and smaller language models that require fewer resources and operate at lower computational and financial cost. Experiments are conducted on two datasets containing questions of varying difficulty. The results demonstrate the strong performance of large LLMs, while highlighting the limitations of smaller, more cost-efficient models. These findings contribute to a better understanding of how LLMs can be utilized in data analytics tasks and their associated limitations.
Andreas Xenofontos, Pavlos Fafalios
Aug 10, 2026cs.CL

TCS-BENCH: Benchmarking State-of-the-Art Generative AI Theoretical Computer Science Research Ability

We introduce TCS-Bench, a benchmark for evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs) on research-level Theoretical Computer Science (TCS) proof generation. TCS-Bench consists of theorem-proving tasks from papers published at top theoretical computer science venues (STOC, FOCS, and SODA). Each task provides the necessary context to derive a self-contained proof for a target result. We evaluate state-of-the-art models on this benchmark. We verify the correctness of generated proofs via a verification agent, and further benchmark the verifier against human-expert proof judgements on a set of target statements and generated proofs pairs. Our reference verifier achieves over 90% accuracy on the expert labeled set.
Vincent Cohen-Addad, Dimitris Paparas, Ernest van Wijland +13