Compositional Reasoning

Scientific claim verification, the task of determining whether claims are entailed by scientific evidence, is fundamental to establishing discoveries in evidence while preventing misinformation. This process involves evaluating each asserted constraint against validated evidence. Under the Closed-World Assumption (CWA), a claim is accepted if and only if all asserted constraints are positively supported. We show that existing verification benchmarks cannot distinguish models enforcing this standard from models applying a simpler shortcut called salient-constraint checking, which applies CWA's rejection criterion only to the most salient constraint and accepts when that constraint is supported. Because existing benchmarks construct infeasible claims by perturbing a single salient element they are insufficient at distinguishing between rigorous claim verification and simple salient-constraint reliance. To separate the two, we construct compositionally infeasible claims where the salient constraint is supported but a non-salient constraint is contradicted. Across model families and modalities, models that otherwise saturate existing benchmarks consistently over-accept these claims, confirming the prevalence of such shortcut reasoning. Via model context interventions, we show that different models and prompting strategies occupy distinct positions on a shared ROC curve, indicating that the gap between model families reflects differences in verification threshold rather than underlying reasoning ability, and that the compositional inference bottleneck is a structural property of current verification behavior that strategy guidance alone cannot overcome.

Large Audio Language Models (LALMs) are increasingly capable of reasoning over audio, yet existing benchmarks offer limited coverage of reasoning in polyphonic audio, where multiple sound events co-occur and induce compositional structure. To address this gap, we introduce PolyBench, a benchmark designed to evaluate compositional reasoning in polyphonic audio, comprising five evaluation subsets that cover counting, classification, detection, concurrency, and duration estimation, all of which require reasoning over multiple concurrent events and their relations. Our evaluation of state-of-the-art LALMs reveals consistent performance degradation in polyphonic settings, indicating a fundamental bottleneck in current LALMs.

Reinforcement Learning (RL) has been shown to significantly boost reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) in math, coding, and multi-hop reasoning tasks. However, RL fine-tuning requires abundant high-quality verifiable data, often sourced from human annotations, generated from frontier LLMs, or scored by LLM-based verifiers. All three have considerable limitations: human-annotated datasets are small and expensive to curate, LLM-generated data is hallucination-prone and costly, and LLM-based verifiers are inaccurate and slow. In this work, we investigate a cheaper alternative: RL fine-tuning on rule-generated synthetic data for multi-hop reasoning tasks. We discover that LLMs fine-tuned on synthetic data perform significantly better on popular real-world question-answering benchmarks, despite the synthetic data containing only fictional knowledge. On stratifying performance by question difficulty, we find that synthetic data teaches LLMs to compose knowledge -- a fundamental and generalizable reasoning skill. Our work highlights rule-generated synthetic reasoning data as a free and scalable resource to improve LLM reasoning capabilities.

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) are rapidly becoming the intelligence brain of end-to-end autonomous driving systems. A key challenge is to assess whether MLLMs can truly understand and follow complex real-world traffic rules. However, existing benchmarks mainly focus on single-rule scenarios like traffic sign recognition, neglecting the complexity of multi-rule concurrency and conflicts in real driving. Consequently, models perform well on simple tasks but often fail or violate rules in real world complex situations. To bridge this gap, we propose DriveCombo, a text and vision-based benchmark for compositional traffic rule reasoning. Inspired by human drivers' cognitive development, we propose a systematic Five-Level Cognitive Ladder that evaluates reasoning from single-rule understanding to multi-rule integration and conflict resolution, enabling quantitative assessment across cognitive stages. We further propose a Rule2Scene Agent that maps language-based traffic rules to dynamic driving scenes through rule crafting and scene generation, enabling scene-level traffic rule visual reasoning. Evaluations of 14 mainstream MLLMs reveal performance drops as task complexity grows, particularly during rule conflicts. After splitting the dataset and fine-tuning on the training set, we further observe substantial improvements in both traffic rule reasoning and downstream planning capabilities. These results highlight the effectiveness of DriveCombo in advancing compliant and intelligent autonomous driving systems.

While visual reasoning for simple analogies has received significant attention, compositional visual relations (CVR) remain relatively unexplored due to their greater complexity. To solve CVR tasks, we propose Predictive Reasoning with Augmented Anomaly Contrastive Learning (PR-A$^2$CL), \ie, to identify an outlier image given three other images that follow the same compositional rules. To address the challenge of modelling abundant compositional rules, an Augmented Anomaly Contrastive Learning is designed to distil discriminative and generalizable features by maximizing similarity among normal instances while minimizing similarity between normal and anomalous outliers. More importantly, a predict-and-verify paradigm is introduced for rule-based reasoning, in which a series of Predictive Anomaly Reasoning Blocks (PARBs) iteratively leverage features from three out of the four images to predict those of the remaining one. Throughout the subsequent verification stage, the PARBs progressively pinpoint the specific discrepancies attributable to the underlying rules. Experimental results on SVRT, CVR and MC$^2$R datasets show that PR-A$^2$CL significantly outperforms state-of-the-art reasoning models.

Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting significantly improves reasoning in Large Language Models, yet the temporal dynamics of the underlying representation geometry remain poorly understood. We investigate these dynamics by applying Manifold Capacity Theory (MCT) to two compositional reasoning tasks: a controlled Boolean logic tree that supports deep mechanistic analysis, and a natural-language eligibility task in which the model has to extract attributes from prose, compare them to thresholds, and compose the local decisions through a fixed evaluation tree. MCT lets us quantify the linear separability of latent representations without the confounding factors of probe training. On both tasks, and across several open-weight models, reasoning manifests as a transient geometric pulse: concept manifolds are untangled into linearly separable subspaces immediately prior to computation and rapidly compressed thereafter. This behavior diverges from standard linear probe accuracy, which remains high long after computation, suggesting a fundamental distinction between information that is merely retrievable and information that is geometrically prepared for processing. We interpret this phenomenon as Dynamic Manifold Management, a mechanism where the model dynamically modulates representational capacity to optimize the bandwidth of the residual stream throughout the reasoning chain.

Large language models achieve strong performance on many complex reasoning tasks, yet their accuracy degrades sharply on benchmarks that require compositional reasoning, including ARC-AGI-2, GPQA, MATH, BBH, and HLE. Existing methods improve reasoning by expanding token-level search through chain-of-thought prompting, self-consistency, or reinforcement learning, but they leave the model's latent representation space fixed. When the required abstraction is not already encoded in this space, performance collapses. We propose Recursive Concept Evolution (RCE), a framework that enables pretrained language models to modify their internal representation geometry during inference. RCE introduces dynamically generated low-rank concept subspaces that are spawned when representational inadequacy is detected, selected through a minimum description length criterion, merged when synergistic, and consolidated via constrained optimization to preserve stability. This process allows the model to construct new abstractions rather than recombining existing ones. We integrate RCE with Mistral-7B and evaluate it across compositional reasoning benchmarks. RCE yields 12-18 point gains on ARC-AGI-2, 8-14 point improvements on GPQA and BBH, and consistent reductions in depth-induced error on MATH and HLE.

The self-attention mechanism, at the heart of the Transformer model, is able to effectively model pairwise interactions between tokens. However, numerous recent works have shown that it is unable to perform basic tasks involving detecting triples of correlated tokens, or compositional tasks where multiple input tokens need to be referenced to generate a result. Some higher-dimensional alternatives to self-attention have been proposed to address this, including higher-order attention and Strassen attention, which can perform some of these polyadic tasks in exchange for slower, superquadratic running times. In this work, we define a vast class of generalizations of self-attention, which we call poly-attention mechanisms. Our mechanisms can incorporate arbitrary higher-order (tensor) computations as well as arbitrary relationship structures between the input tokens, and they include the aforementioned alternatives as special cases. We then systematically study their computational complexity and representational strength, including giving new algorithms and matching complexity-theoretic lower bounds on the time complexity of computing the attention matrix exactly as well as approximately, and tightly determining which polyadic tasks they can each perform. Our results give interesting trade-offs between different desiderata for these mechanisms, including a tight relationship between how expressive a mechanism is, and how large the coefficients in the model may be so that the mechanism can be approximated in almost-linear time. Notably, we give a new attention mechanism which can be computed exactly in quadratic time, and which can perform function composition for any fixed number of functions. Prior mechanisms, even for just composing two functions, could only be computed in superquadratic time, and our new lower bounds show that faster algorithms for them are not possible.

Compositional visual reasoning has emerged as a key research frontier in multimodal AI, aiming to endow machines with the human-like ability to decompose visual scenes, ground intermediate concepts, and perform multi-step logical inference. While early surveys focus on monolithic vision-language models or general multimodal reasoning, a dedicated synthesis of the rapidly expanding compositional visual reasoning literature is still missing. We fill this gap with a comprehensive survey spanning 2023 to 2025 that systematically reviews 260+ papers from top venues (CVPR, ICCV, NeurIPS, ICML, ACL, etc.). We first formalize core definitions and describe why compositional approaches offer advantages in cognitive alignment, semantic fidelity, robustness, interpretability, and data efficiency. Next, we trace a five-stage paradigm shift: from prompt-enhanced language-centric pipelines, through tool-enhanced LLMs and tool-enhanced VLMs, to recently minted chain-of-thought reasoning and unified agentic VLMs, highlighting their architectural designs, strengths, and limitations. We then catalog 60+ benchmarks and corresponding metrics that probe compositional visual reasoning along dimensions such as grounding accuracy, chain-of-thought faithfulness, and high-resolution perception. Drawing on these analyses, we distill key insights, identify open challenges (e.g., limitations of LLM-based reasoning, hallucination, a bias toward deductive reasoning, scalable supervision, tool integration, and benchmark limitations), and outline future directions, including world-model integration, human-AI collaborative reasoning, and richer evaluation protocols. By offering a unified taxonomy, historical roadmap, and critical outlook, this survey aims to serve as a foundational reference and inspire the next generation of compositional visual reasoning research.