Logical Reasoning
Momentum
11 papers in the last four weeks, up 175% on the four weeks before. 0.1% of all new papers.
Latest papers 123
Transitive inference is the challenge of inferring that A < C from knowing only adjacent relations (A < B, B < C). It is solved by humans and animals not through logical chaining but via an analogue mental number line, whose signature is the symbolic distance effect: distant comparisons are easier than nearby ones. We ask whether Transformers acquire the same primitive, training small models exclusively on adjacent comparisons from a hidden total order and evaluating generalization to unseen distant pairs. We find that out-of-distribution generalization emerges alongside a striking geometric reorganization: entity embeddings collapse onto a one-dimensional manifold whose principal axis recovers the hidden rank order with near-perfect fidelity, and this structure is sensitive to optimization in ways that produce grokking-like transient dynamics. Critically, even when accuracy is at ceiling, decision confidence and geometric separation both scale monotonically with rank distance, directly mirroring the symbolic distance effect observed across decades of behavioural experiments on humans, primates, and rodents. We further show the same rank-aligned geometry in a pretrained large language model, where it tracks the topology of each ordinal relation: linear for sizes and digits, cyclic for months. These results ground a 50-year-old behavioural regularity in the geometry of learned representations, offering a mechanistic account of transitive inference that bridges cognitive science and modern neural networks.
Tackling the Root of Misinformation by Teaching Laypeople about Logical Fallacies via Socratic Questioning and Critical Argumentation
Identifying logical fallacies in everyday discourse is challenging for many people. This challenge is amplified in the era of Large Language Models (LLMs), where malicious agents can deploy fallacious arguments to disseminate misinformation at scale. In this work, we explore the potential of LLMs as part of the solution. We introduce LFTutor, an intelligent tutoring system which uses LLMs to tutor laypeople and help them learn about logical fallacies. LFTutor integrates intent-driven Socratic questioning and critical argumentation principles to actively engage learners to reflect on their reasoning. Through both automatic and human evaluations, we demonstrate that LFTutor significantly outperforms baseline LLMs lacking these pedagogical strategies. This work highlights the promise of combining LLMs with pedagogical scaffolding to foster critical thinking and argument literacy in the age of AI.
MAVEN: Improving Generalization in Agentic Tool Calling
Generalization across agentic tool-calling environments remains a central challenge for reliable agentic reasoning systems. Although large language models achieve strong results on individual benchmarks, their ability to compose reasoning strategies, preserve intermediate states, and coordinate tools across domains remains underexplored. We present MAVEN (Modular Agentic Verification and Execution Network), a lightweight symbolic reasoning scaffold for structured decomposition, adaptive tool orchestration, and intermediate verification. We evaluate MAVEN across established tool-calling benchmarks, including BFCL v3, TauBench, Tau2Bench, AceBench, and introduce MAVEN-Bench, a stress-test benchmark for multi-step mathematical and physical reasoning with explicit verification and adversarial task composition. MAVEN-Bench exposes a substantial gap between partial reasoning quality and end-to-end task success; in direct MAVEN-Bench runs, MAVEN improves its GPT-OSS-120b base model from 48% to 71% accuracy without additional training. It also remains competitive with frontier proprietary baselines while using an open-weight backbone with an estimated cost ratio of roughly 1/10, suggesting that lightweight verification-centered scaffolds can strengthen compositional reasoning and motivate more process-aware evaluation of agents in the wild.
Many Logics, One Methodology: A Plea for Logical Pluralism in Formalised Reasoning (preprint)
This position statement looks back on two decades of work on shallow embeddings of non-classical logics in classical higher-order logic (HOL), a line of research that expanded into a range of logic embeddings in HOL and inspired the LogiKEy logic-pluralistic knowledge representation and reasoning methodology. This paper advances the case for logical pluralism at object-logic level within a unifying meta-logical framework such as LogiKEy, grounding the argument in computational metaphysics. More broadly, it advocates principled support for logical pluralism in modern proof assistants, and cautions against logical imperialism -- the rigid adoption of a single foundational logic for large-scale theory developments -- which impedes the interdisciplinary reuse that LogiKEy is designed to enable.
Reasoning Depth and Environment Complexity: A Controlled Study of RLVR Data Allocation across Logical Reasoning Tasks
Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) has become central to post-training reasoning models, yet a key limitation of existing studies is their narrow view of the reasoning space: difficulty is treated as reasoning depth alone, and reward is concentrated on forward deductive state tracking. We instead characterize the reasoning space along two dimensions. Difficulty. Beyond reasoning depth, we study environment complexity, where models must identify the correct path amid distractors and interacting structures. Rewarded reasoning form. We consider four abilities core to real-world reasoning: deductive state tracking, abductive recovery of hidden events or facts, inductive rule induction, and analogical transfer. To disentangle these factors, we construct a synthetic knowledge-graph environment with controlled pre- and post-training distributions, where each instance varies along depth, complexity, and task family. Three findings emerge: joint depth-complexity coverage outperforms single-axis recipes; reasoning families respond non-uniformly, with abductive reasoning degrading outside the RL-covered region and task correlations clustering into deductive-abductive and inductive-analogy pairs; and uniform mixing outperforms staged curricula under a fixed budget. We also find that recent off-the-shelf models exhibit the same deductive-over-abductive asymmetry, suggesting that this gap is not merely an artifact of our controlled setup.
On the Stability and Realizability of Recurrent Polynomial Surrogate Ternary Logic Gate Networks
Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs) can learn to predict Signal Temporal Logic (STL) verdicts online from partial trajectories, but deploying them as runtime monitors in safety-critical systems demands more than predictive accuracy. Standard RNN architectures offer no structural guarantee that outputs degrade gracefully under sensor degradation; a dropped input can silently flip a verdict from safe to unsafe. We introduce the Recurrent Differentiable Ternary Logic Gate Network (R-DTLGN), a recurrent architecture that operates over Kleene's three-valued logic , where explicitly represents unknown. The R-DTLGN trains through continuous polynomial surrogates and hardens to a discrete ternary logic circuit at inference. We analyze the hardened circuit through two gate vocabularies derived from two orderings on the ternary domain: numerically monotone gates ensure stable recurrent dynamics, while information-monotone gates, when present, guarantee principled abstention (unknown inputs never produce wrong outputs) and monotonicity in input certainty (more information can only improve the verdict). We show that the recurrent connections required by bounded STL operators use exclusively AND and OR, which belong to both vocabularies, linking the monitoring task to the architecture's guarantees. A realizability bound derived from the STL formula's temporal operators directly sizes the network's hidden state, replacing hyperparameter search with a formula-driven specification. We evaluate on STL specifications over D4RL PointMaze navigation data, testing prediction accuracy, degradation under predicate dropout, and the accuracy-versus-safety tradeoff between two label construction pipelines. The R-DTLGN is, to our knowledge, the first recurrent architecture that couples learned temporal prediction with formal degradation guarantees rooted in three-valued logic.
Arrow-Type Impossibility for Genuinely Modal Judgments
Judgment aggregation studies how to combine individual judgments on logically related propositions into a collective judgment. Classical impossibility results show that sufficiently strong logical interconnections force dictatorship under natural aggregation axioms. In this paper, we ask whether such impossibility can still arise when the objects of aggregation are required to be genuinely modal judgments rather than plain factual propositions. Since modal logic contains propositional logic, this question is meaningful only if one excludes fact-based aggregation in disguise. We show that Arrow-type impossibility already re-emerges in a strikingly sparse modal setting. We prove an impossibility theorem on a simple cyclic frame for an agenda generated from a single propositional variable by repeated applications of a single modal operator, and we further demonstrate this phenomenon for an alternative family of frames satisfying a natural symmetry condition. Thus, even under a modal-operator requirement, semantic structure alone can generate the logical interconnections needed for dictatorship. Technically, our analysis has two layers. First, we prove a semantic reduction theorem showing that certain iterated modal patterns can be collapsed by shifting the evaluation point. Second, building on this reduction, we identify a local-to-global frame mechanism by which frame geometry yields minimally inconsistent modal judgment sets and the strong path-connectivity required for impossibility. The same reduction also turns consistency checking into a small combinatorial covering problem, which yields efficient implementations of non-dictatorial aggregation procedures.
A mathematical theory of balancing relational generalization and memorization
Humans, animals, and modern machine learning models exhibit impressive abilities to learn complex behaviors and generalize these behaviors to unseen situations. This ability requires us to learn rules and regularities that allow for such generalizations. At the same time, in most complex environments, any rule will have its exceptions. How do learning systems balance between learning general regularities and memorizing exceptions? We argue that a lack of task paradigms has hindered the study of this essential ability. To address this gap, we introduce a novel task, transitive inference with exceptions, that tests for relational generalization and memorization of an exception to the relational rule. We then analytically characterize the behavior of a simple, theoretically tractable model of neural network learning (kernel ridge regression) across a broad family of representations and task parameters. We find that these models can balance between relational generalization and memorization, but unlike for transitive inference without an exception, successful generalization is sensitive to the specific representational geometry. We explain why this task is more challenging mechanistically by drawing on our analytical theory. Finally, we validate our theoretical insights in pretrained language models that are finetuned on ordered relations, finding that these models successfully generalize according to the transitive rule, but also make the kinds of systematic mistakes predicted by our theory. Overall, our theory shows how learning systems can balance between relational generalization and memorization, explains how this can go wrong, and emphasizes the need for new task paradigms designed to probe this ability.
Mediative Fuzzy Logic: From Type-1 Foundations to Type-2, Type-3 and Quantum Extensions
Mediative Fuzzy Logic was conceived as a practical scheme for reconciling hesitant or conflicting assessments in fuzzy control and decision-making. However, its logical and semantic foundations remain underdeveloped, especially beyond operational type-1 settings. This article develops a unified account of the type-1 core together with interval type-2, granular type-3, and quantum extensions. We characterize the mediative operator as a convex aggregation controlled by hesitation and contradiction, model mediative truth values as independent truth-falsity pairs in a continuous bilattice-like structure, and introduce a propositional system extending a standard t-norm-based fuzzy logic with a mediative connective. We establish soundness, paraconsistency, and conservativity over the underlying fuzzy base for formulas without mediation, and formulate coherent semantic extensions to interval type-2 truth values, granule-indexed local evaluations, and effects and density operators on Hilbert spaces. An autonomous-braking sensor-fusion example illustrates how the framework supports transparent, conservative, and safety-first decisions under incomplete, heterogeneous, and mildly contradictory evidence. Under suitable assumptions, the higher-level formulations reduce to the type-1 case, clarifying coherence across levels and reliably supporting future work in intelligent decision systems.
The Impact of AI Usage and Informativeness on Skill Development in Logical Reasoning
Artificial intelligence (AI) is being increasingly integrated into human problem-solving, yet its effects on individual skill development remain unclear. We examine how both AI usage and informativeness can shape learning in the context of a controlled logical reasoning task with on-demand access to AI assistance. We find that greater AI usage is associated with weaker skill development: heavy AI users underperform relative to comparable peers, whereas light AI users perform similarly to matched users who do not use AI. We also find in our study that these patterns are mediated by AI informativeness. Low-information AI neither improves immediate performance nor preserves performance after AI assistance is removed, and is linked to weaker learning overall. On the other hand, high-information AI was found to improve short-run performance without reducing post-AI outcomes on average in our experiments, but with heterogeneous effects. Our findings in general suggest that AI can, depending on context, either complement human skill development by amplifying independent reasoning or can act as a substitute that undermines such reasoning, with the implication that regulating AI access and usage will be important for promoting skill development in the presence of AI assistance.
Tracing the ongoing emergence of human-like reasoning in Large Language Models
Humans effortlessly go beyond literal meanings: If you mow the lawn, I will give you fifty dollars, is typically understood as implying that the speaker will pay only if the lawn is mowed, whereas If you are hungry, there is pizza in the oven implies that pizza is available regardless of the hearers hunger. Large Language Models - LLMs - show human-like performance on many tasks, yet it remains unclear whether they reason like humans. To address this, we conducted a population-matching experiment assessing how twentyfive LLMs compute conditional inferences across four languages, compared to an equal number of humans per language. We find that humans enrich logical reasoning through pragmatic inferences across languages. Model behavior is more variable. Some LLMs perfectly follow the truth-table of conditionals but they ignore pragmatic inferences, while others deviate from the truth-table, adhering to a single interpretation across the board, thus reflecting accurate rule-based processing but not human-like reasoning. Overall, LLMs are accurate semantic operators, but fail to capture the pragmatic enrichments characteristic of human reasoning. Crucially, LLM accuracy is neither predicted nor boosted by open vs. closed status, training orientation, or architecture type, suggesting that pragmatic reasoning is still an emerging ability in the cognitive toolkit of artificial systems.
On the Complexity of Entailment for Cumulative Propositional Dependence Logics
This paper establishes and proves complexity results for entailment for cumulative propositional dependence logic and for cumulative propositional logic with team semantics. As recently shown, cumulative logics are famously characterised by System~C and exactly captured by the cumulative models of Kraus, Lehmann and Magidor. This gives rise to the entailment problem via relational models, which is specifically considered here.
Sutra: Tensor-Op RNNs as a Compilation Target for Vector Symbolic Architectures
Sutra is a typed, purely functional programming language whose compiled forward pass is a PyTorch neural network. The compiler beta-reduces the whole program -- primitives, control flow, string I/O -- to one fused tensor-op graph over a frozen embedding substrate. Rotation binding, unbind, bundle, polynomial Kleene three-valued logic, and tail-recursive loops all lower to tensor operations; the Kleene connectives are Lagrange-interpolated polynomials exact on the {-1, 0, +1} truth grid. Validation is one fact tested two ways. (1) The same program runs on four frozen embeddings spanning two modalities -- three text encoders (nomic-embed-text, all-minilm, mxbai-embed-large) and one protein language model (ESM-2) -- and decodes bundles at 100% accuracy through width k=8 on every substrate, where the textbook Hadamard product has already collapsed (2.5% on mxbai-embed-large, 7.5% on all-minilm). (2) PyTorch autograd flows through the actually compiled graph: a fuzzy-rule classifier written in .su trains from random init (18.7 +/- 9.5%; chance = 20%, five classes) to 100.0 +/- 0.0% (three seeds) by backpropagating through the emitted graph, the symbolic source unmodified. A weighted variant additionally trains a scalar cosine gain and writes it back into the .su source as a numeric literal; recompiling reproduces the trained behaviour to ~2e-7 per logit, so the trained model is itself legible, recompilable code. The same artifact is therefore both a logic program and a trainable neural network.
High Quality Embeddings for Horn Logic Reasoning
Neural networks can be trained to rank the choices made by logical reasoners, resulting in more efficient searches for answers. A key step in this process is creating useful embeddings, i.e., numeric representations of logical statements. This paper introduces and evaluates several approaches to creating embeddings that result in better downstream results. We train embeddings using triplet loss, which requires examples consisting of an anchor, a positive example, and a negative example. We introduce three ideas: generating anchors that are more likely to have repeated terms, generating positive and negative examples in a way that ensures a good balance between easy, medium, and hard examples, and periodically emphasizing the hardest examples during training. We conduct several experiments to evaluate this approach, including a comparison of different embeddings across different knowledge bases, in an attempt to identify what characteristics make an embedding well-suited to a particular reasoning task.
LLMEval-Logic: A Solver-Verified Chinese Benchmark for Logical Reasoning of LLMs with Adversarial Hardening
Evaluating large language models (LLMs) on natural-language logical reasoning is essential because rule-governed tasks require conclusions to follow strictly from stated premises. Many existing logical-reasoning benchmarks are generated by templating natural-language items from sampled formulas, provide only coarse or unaudited formal annotations, and are now quickly saturated by frontier reasoning models. We present LLMEval-Logic, a Chinese logical reasoning benchmark built from realistic situational scenarios. Its pipeline forward-authors and expert-audits natural-language items together with their reference formalizations, verifies annotated answers with Z3, constructs expert rubrics for natural-to-formal grading, and hardens selected items through a closed-loop adversarial workflow. The benchmark is released in two paired subsets: a 246-item Base subset shipped with 1,400 expert-developed rubric atoms, and a 190-item Hard subset with 938 multi-step sub-questions over closed model spaces. Evaluating 14 frontier LLMs on LLMEval-Logic reveals substantial gaps in current models: the best model reaches only 37.5% Hard Item Accuracy, and even with reference symbols the highest joint Z3+Rubric formalization score among evaluated models reaches only 60.16%. Our benchmark is publicly available at https://github.com/llmeval/LLMEval-Logic.
Expressive Power of Deep Homomorphism Networks over Relational Databases
The expressive limitations of message-passing Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have motivated a wide range of more powerful graph learning architectures. We advocate Deep Homomorphism Networks (DHNs) as a model particularly well-suited for learning over relational databases, due to their close connection to important fragments of SQL such as conjunctive queries. We study the precise expressive power of DHNs by relating them to various natural fragments and extensions of first-order logic (FO). For DHNs with max, sum, and mean aggregations, we establish connections to the unary negation fragment (UNFO) and to the extensions of UNFO with counting quantifiers and with ratio quantifiers. We further relate sum-aggregation DHNs to the unary quantifier alternation fragment of FO and to an extension of FO with expressive counting. Through the classical correspondence between FO and SQL, these results also illuminate the relation between DHNs and SQL. They also enable us to study the decidability of two fundamental static analysis problems for DHNs, the emptiness problem and the subsumption problem. Finally, we confirm through experiments that the established differences in expressive power are reflected in the performance on suitable prediction tasks.
Orthologic for SAT Solving
We present a new algorithm for deciding formula entailment in orthologic (a sound approximation of classical logic) that avoids the costly preprocessing phase of prior implementations while retaining the same worst-case complexity. We then introduce a family of synthetic SAT benchmarks based on the observation that, for any formula , the equivalence is a tautology whose Tseitin encoding yields unsatisfiable instances that are hard for state-of-the-art SAT solvers yet have short orthologic proofs. Applied to EPFL arithmetic circuits, our algorithm solves these instances efficiently while Kissat times out on a significant fraction. Finally, we show that using orthologic normalization as a preprocessing step can improve SAT solving time on some hard problems.
Derivation Prompting: A Logic-Based Method for Improving Retrieval-Augmented Generation
The application of Large Language Models to Question Answering has shown great promise, but important challenges such as hallucinations and erroneous reasoning arise when using these models, particularly in knowledge-intensive, domain-specific tasks. To address these issues, we introduce Derivation Prompting, a novel prompting technique for the generation step of the Retrieval-Augmented Generation framework. Inspired by logic derivations, this method involves deriving conclusions from initial hypotheses through the systematic application of predefined rules. It constructs a derivation tree that is interpretable and adds control over the generation process. We applied this method in a specific case study, significantly reducing unacceptable answers compared to traditional RAG and long-context window methods.
A Horn extension of DL-Lite with NL data complexity
The literature on ontology-mediated query answering (OMQA) has been shaped by two key results: first-order rewritability for DL-Lite, and PTime-hardness of data complexity for essentially every description logic beyond it. This has effectively positioned DL-Lite as the only practical choice for query rewriting, restricting OMQA solutions to first-order queries and ontologies that can be rewritten into them. This AC0 vs. PTime dichotomy is especially limiting if we consider that OMQA targets graph-structured data, and that standard graph query languages (including the recent ISO standards GQL and SQL/PGQ) are typically NL-complete. Towards identifying a rich Horn DL that can be rewritten into graph query languages and that can still express many ELI and DL-Lite ontologies, we introduce a stratification mechanism for ELI that controls the interaction between conjunction and recursion. In this way, we obtain ELbotpreceq, a description logic that strictly extends the core DL-Lite, supports reachability axioms and restricted conjunction, and allows for reasoning in NL. We establish the NL upper bound via a rewriting into nested two-way regular path queries, a fragment of GQL, providing initial evidence that our ontology language is a promising candidate for extending OMQA to graph query languages.
On the Size Complexity and Decidability of First-Order Progression
Progression, the task of updating a knowledge base to reflect action effects, generally requires second-order logic. Identifying first-order special cases, by restricting either the knowledge base or action effects, has long been a central topic in reasoning about actions. It is known that local-effect, normal, and acyclic actions, three increasingly expressive classes, admit first-order progression. However, a systematic analysis of the size of such progressions, crucial for practical applications, has been missing. In this paper, using the framework of Situation Calculus, we show that under reasonable assumptions, first-order progression for these action classes grows only polynomially. Moreover, we show that when the KB belongs to decidable fragments such as two-variable first-order logic or universal theories with constants, the progression remains within the same fragment, ensuring decidability and practical applicability.
DiagnosticIQ: A Benchmark for LLM-Based Industrial Maintenance Action Recommendation from Symbolic Rules
Monitoring complex industrial assets relies on engineer-authored symbolic rules that trigger based on sensor conditions and prompt technicians to perform corrective actions. The bottleneck is not detection but response: translating rules into maintenance steps requires asset-specific knowledge gained through years of practice. We investigate whether LLMs can serve as decision support for this rule-to-action step and introduce \ours{}, a benchmark of 6{,}690 expert-validated multiple-choice questions from 118 rule-action pairs across 16 asset types. We contribute (i) a symbolic-to-MCQA pipeline normalizing rules to Disjunctive Normal Form with embedding-based distractor sampling, (ii) five variants probing distinct failure modes (Pro, Pert, Verbose, Aug, Rationale), and (iii) a benchmark of 29 LLMs and 4 embedding baselines. A human evaluation (9 practitioners, mean 45.0%) confirms \ours{} requires specialist knowledge beyond operational experience. Three findings stand out. The frontier has closed: the top three LLMs lie within one Macro point, with Bradley-Terry Elo placing claude-opus-4-6 30 points above the next model. Yet \ours{},Pro exposes brittleness, with every model losing 13--60% relative accuracy under distractor expansion. \ours{},Aug exposes pattern-matching: under condition inversion, frontier models still select the original answer 49--63% of the time. The deployment bottleneck is not capability but calibration: frontier models handle template-style fault detection but break under structural perturbation.
RuleSafe-VL: Evaluating Rule-Conditioned Decision Reasoning in Vision-Language Content Moderation
Platform content moderation applies explicit policy rules and context-dependent conditions to decide whether user content is allowed, restricted, or removed. A correct moderation outcome must therefore depend on which rules a case activates, how those rules interact, and whether the available evidence is sufficient. Current multimodal safety benchmarks largely reduce moderation to matching predefined final labels, leaving this underlying rule structure untested. As a result, a high benchmark score reveals little about whether a model applies the policy correctly or arrives at the correct label through superficial cues. To evaluate this rule-governed process, we introduce RuleSafe-VL, a benchmark for rule-conditioned decision reasoning in vision-language content moderation. Derived from publicly available platform moderation policies, RuleSafe-VL formalizes 93 atomic rules and 92 typed rule relations, yielding 2,166 context-sensitive image-text cases across three high-risk policy families. Its four diagnostic tasks decompose moderation into a rule-conditioned decision chain. They identify activated rules, recover rule interactions, judge decision sufficiency, and resolve outcomes once missing context is supplied. Experiments on 10 frontier, open-source, and safety-oriented VLMs reveal rule-relation recovery as the dominant bottleneck, where the best model reaches only 64.8 Macro-F1 and some safety-oriented models fall below 7 Macro-F1. Decision-state prediction also remains unreliable, peaking at 64.5 Macro-F1. RuleSafe-VL shifts moderation evaluation from final-label scoring toward diagnostic assessment of rule-conditioned decision reasoning.
Bounded Fitting for Expressive Description Logics
Bounded fitting is an attractive paradigm for learning logical formulas from labeled data examples that offers PAC-style generalization guarantees and can often be implemented leveraging SAT solvers. It has been successfully applied to learning concepts of the description logic ALC. We study bounded fitting for learning concepts in expressive description logics that extend ALC with inverse roles, qualified number restrictions, and feature comparisons. We investigate under which conditions bounded fitting keeps its favorable theoretical properties in this setting, and implement it using a SAT solver. We compare our tool with state-of-the-art concept learners with encouraging results, demonstrating that it is a practical approach to expressive concept learning.
From 0-Order Selection to 2-Order Judgment: Combinatorial Hardening Exposes Compositional Failures in Frontier LLMs
Multiple-choice reasoning benchmarks face dual challenges: rapid saturation from advancing models and data contamination that undermines static evaluations. Ad-hoc hardening methods (paraphrasing, perturbation) attempt to increase difficulty but sacrifice logical validity for surface complexity, falling short to challenge advanced reasoning models. We present LogiHard, a formal framework that deterministically transforms 0-order selection into 2-order logical judgment, which significantly increases the thinking overhead and reasoning steps. The framework integrates Item Response Theory (IRT) for computerized adaptive testing (CAT), enabling precise difficulty control with fewer questions than static benchmarks. We instantiate LogiHard-2k, a logical reasoning dataset constructed by cognitively ranking high-stakes examination questions via 9-dimensional analysis of model thinking traces, followed by combinatorial transformation of high-difficulty items. Evaluation across twelve state-of-the-art models reveals an accuracy degradation ranging from 31% to 56% on combinatorially hardened questions. LLMs suffer from the multi-select failure and early exit bias, which are not shared by human testees. Zero-shot transfer to MMLU demonstrates 47% accuracy degradation (89.84% to 42.86%), confirming applicability across domains with provable validity preservation. The consistent aggregate degeneration is domain-agnostic and stems not from knowledge deficits but from a combinatorial reasoning gap, reflecting a training-induced completeness-verification deficit.
Neurosymbolic Framework for Concept-Driven Logical Reasoning in Skeleton-Based Human Action Recognition
Skeleton-based human activity recognition has achieved strong empirical performance, yet most existing models remain black boxes and difficult to interpret. In this work, we introduce a neurosymbolic formulation of skeleton-based HAR that reframes action recognition as concept-driven first-order logical reasoning over motion primitives. Our framework bridges representation learning and symbolic inference by grounding first-order logic predicates in learnable spatial and temporal motion concepts. Specifically, we employ a standard spatio-temporal skeleton encoder to extract latent motion representations, which are then mapped to interpretable concept predicates via a spatio-temporal concept decoder that explicitly separates pose-centric and dynamics-centric abstractions. These concept predicates are composed through differentiable first-order logic layers, enabling the model to learn human-readable logical rules that govern action semantics. To impose semantic structure on the learned concepts, we align skeleton representations with LLM-derived descriptions of atomic motion primitives, establishing a shared conceptual space for perception and reasoning. Extensive experiments on NTU RGB+D 60/120 and NW-UCLA demonstrate that our approach achieves competitive recognition performance while providing explicit, interpretable explanations grounded in logical structure. Our results highlight neurosymbolic reasoning as an effective paradigm for interpretable spatio-temporal action understanding. Code: https://github.com/Mr-TalhaIlyas/REASON
Can RL Teach Long-Horizon Reasoning to LLMs? Expressiveness Is Key
Reinforcement learning (RL) has been applied to improve large language model (LLM) reasoning, yet the systematic study of how training scales with task difficulty has been hampered by the lack of controlled, scalable environments. Observed LLM shortcomings in long-horizon reasoning have raised the prospect that they are fundamental to the autoregressive transformer architecture. To address this, we introduce ScaleLogic, a synthetic logical reasoning framework that offers independent control over two axes of difficulty: the depth of the required proof planning (i.e., the horizon) and the expressiveness of the underlying logic. Our proposed framework supports a wide range of logics: from simple implication-only logic ("if-then") towards more expressive first-order reasoning with conjunction ("and"), disjunction ("or"), negation ("not"), and universal quantification ("for all"). Using this framework, we show that the RL training compute follows a power law with respect to reasoning depth (, ), and that the scaling exponent increases monotonically with logical expressiveness, from to . On downstream mathematics and general reasoning benchmarks, more expressive training settings yield both larger performance gains (up to points) and more compute-efficient transfer compared to less expressive settings, demonstrating that what a model is trained on, not just how much it is trained, shapes downstream transfer. We further show that the power-law relationship holds across multiple RL methods, and curriculum-based training substantially improves scaling efficiency. More broadly, our results demonstrate that LLM shortcomings in long-horizon reasoning are not fundamental to the underlying architecture, and can be addressed by improved training methodology and data.
Hypothesis generation and updating in large language models
Large language models (LLMs) increasingly help people solve problems, from debugging code to repairing machinery. This process requires generating plausible hypotheses from partial descriptions, then updating them as more information arrives. Yet how LLMs perform this form of inference, and how close it is to optimal, remains unclear. We study this question in the number game, a controlled setting in which a learner infers the hypothesis supported by a few positive integers, such as : a rule like powers of 2 or an interval like numbers near 20. We measure the posterior over hypotheses using three complementary probes: posterior prediction, hypothesis evaluation, and hypothesis generation. We then compare LLM behavior with an optimal Bayesian model and human behavior, and test whether the same posterior is expressed across probes. LLMs are often well described by a two-parameter Bayesian fit, but with systematic offsets: by default they show a strong-sampling assumption that creates an implicit Occam's razor, favoring narrower hypotheses, while thinking mode shifts them toward greater prior reliance. We also find a robust evaluation--generation gap: LLMs select more correct hypotheses during hypothesis evaluation but generate simpler, more rule-like hypotheses. Finally, this Bayesian-with-bias pattern does not extrapolate. Models can behave as if they hold rule-like hypotheses over observed examples, yet generalize poorly to parts of the hypothesis domain not covered by those examples. Our results highlight a limitation of LLMs as general problem solvers, especially for scientific inference, where hypotheses must go beyond the data.
UFAL-CUNI at SemEval-2026 Task 11: An Efficient Modular Neuro-symbolic Method for Syllogistic Reasoning
This paper describes our system submitted to SemEval-2026 Task 11: Disentangling Content and Formal Reasoning in Large Language Models. We present an efficient modular neuro-symbolic approach, combining a symbolic prover with small reasoning LLMs (4B parameters). The system consists of an LLM-based parser that translates natural language syllogisms to a first-order logic (FOL) representation, an automated theorem prover, and two optional modules: machine translation for multilingual inputs and a symbolic retrieval component for the identification of relevant premises. The system achieves competitive accuracy and relatively low content effect on most subtasks. Our ablations show that this approach outperforms LLM-based zero-shot baselines in this parameter size range, but also reveal limited multilingual capabilities of small LLMs. Finally, we include a discussion of the task's main ranking metric and analyze its limitations.
The Scaling Properties of Implicit Deductive Reasoning in Transformers
We investigate the scaling properties of implicit deductive reasoning over Horn clauses in depth-bounded Transformers. By systematically decorrelating provability from spurious features and enforcing algorithmic alignment, we find that in sufficiently deep models with a bidirectional prefix mask, implicit reasoning approaches explicit CoT performance across graph topologies and problem widths, though CoT remains necessary for depth extrapolation.
Efficient Temporal Datalog Materialisation for Composite Event Recognition
Several applications demand the timely detection of critical situations, such as threats to safety and transparency, over high-velocity streams of symbolic events. This demand has motivated the development of (i) event specification languages, which define composite events via temporal patterns over simpler events, and (ii) stream reasoning frameworks, evaluating patterns expressed in these languages. However, event specification languages are typically studied in isolation, complicating their comparison in terms of expressivity and obscuring the scope of their associated stream reasoners. To mitigate this issue, we map practical fragments of prominent event specification languages into Temporal Datalog->-, a temporal Datalog with stratified negation and no future dependencies. To support efficient stream reasoning over Temporal Datalog->-, we propose Streaming Trigger Graphs, an extension of a state-of-the-art technique for Datalog materialisation. Our approach yields a uniform composite event recognition mechanism that has the potential to generalise across a wide range of practical event specification languages.