Reasoning Graphs

Electroencephalogram (EEG) signals are vital for automated seizure detection, but their inherent noise makes robust representation learning challenging. Existing graph construction methods, whether correlation-based or learning-based, often generate redundant or irrelevant edges due to the noisy nature of EEG data. This significantly impairs the quality of graph representation and limits downstream task performance. Motivated by the remarkable reasoning and contextual understanding capabilities of large language models (LLMs), we explore the idea of using LLMs as graph edge refiners. Specifically, we propose a two-stage framework: we first verify that LLM-based edge refinement can effectively identify and remove redundant connections, leading to significant improvements in seizure detection accuracy and more meaningful graph structures. Building on this insight, we further develop a robust solution where the initial graph is constructed using a Transformer-based edge predictor and multilayer perceptron, assigning probability scores to potential edges and applying a threshold to determine their existence. The LLM then acts as an edge set refiner, making informed decisions based on both textual and statistical features of node pairs to validate the remaining connections. Extensive experiments on TUSZ dataset demonstrate that our LLM-refined graph learning framework not only enhances task performance but also yields cleaner and more interpretable graph representations.

Effective mental health counseling is a complex, theory-driven process requiring the simultaneous integration of psychological frameworks, real-time distress signals, and strategic intervention planning. This level of clinical reasoning is critical for safety and therapeutic effectiveness but is often missing in general-purpose Large Language Models (LLMs). We introduce SAGE (Strategy-Aware Graph-Enhanced), a novel framework designed to bridge the gap between structured clinical knowledge and generative AI. SAGE constructs a heterogeneous graph that unifies conversational dynamics with a psychologically grounded layer, explicitly anchoring interactions in a theory-driven lexicon. Our architecture first employs a Next Strategy Classifier to identify the optimal therapeutic intervention. Subsequently, a Graph-Aware Attention mechanism projects graph-derived structural signals into soft prompts, conditioning the LLM to generate responses that maintain clinical depth. Validated through both automated metrics and expert human evaluation, SAGE outperforms baselines in strategy prediction and recommended response quality. By providing actionable intervention recommendations, SAGE serves as a cutting-edge decision-support tool designed to augment human expertise in high-stakes crisis counseling.

Diagram question answering (Diagram QA) requires reasoning-level attribution that links each question-answer pair to all visual regions needed to derive the answer, rather than only the region containing the final response. Creating such structured evidence across diagrams, charts, maps, circuits, and infographics is time-consuming, and existing annotation tools tightly couple their interfaces to dataset-specific formats. We present DIAGRAMS, a lightweight, schema-driven review framework that decouples interface logic from dataset-specific JSON structures through an internal meta-schema and dataset adapters. Given an image and QA pair with optional candidate regions, the system performs QA-conditioned evidence selection and proposes the regions required for reasoning. When QA pairs or candidate regions are missing, it generates them and supports human verification and refinement. Across six Diagram QA datasets, model-suggested evidence achieves 85.39% precision and 75.30% recall against reviewer-final selections (micro-averaged). These results indicate that the review-first framework reduces manual region creation while maintaining high agreement with final reasoning-level attributions. We release a public demo and installable package to support dataset auditing, grounded supervision creation, and grounded evaluation.

Diagram question answering (DQA) requires models to interpret structured visual representations such as charts, maps, infographics, circuit schematics, and scientific diagrams. Recent vision-language models (VLMs) often achieve high answer accuracy on these tasks, yet correct answers do not guarantee that models ground their reasoning in the diagram regions that support the prediction. Models may instead rely on textual correlations or dataset artifacts without identifying the visual evidence required to verify the answer. This limitation prevents reliable evaluation of diagram reasoning and reduces interpretability. We introduce DRAGON, a benchmark for evaluating evidence-grounded visual reasoning in diagrams. Given a diagram, a question, and the correct answer, a model must predict bounding boxes that correspond to the visual elements required to justify the answer. These evidence regions may include answer-bearing components, textual labels, legends, axes, connectors, and other supporting structures involved in the reasoning process. The DRAGON dataset contains 11,664 annotated question instances collected from six diagram QA datasets: ChartQA, Circuit-VQA, InfographicsVQA, MapIQ, MapWise, and AI2D. We release a 2,445-instance benchmark test set with human-verified reasoning evidence annotations and a standardized evaluation framework. We evaluate eight recent VLMs and analyze their ability to localize reasoning evidence across diverse diagram domains. DRAGON enables systematic evaluation of diagram reasoning and supports future research on models that ground their predictions in visual evidence.

We study clinical trial table reasoning, where answers are not directly stored in visible cells but must be reasoned from semantic understanding through normalization, classification, extraction, or lightweight domain reasoning. Motivated by the observation that current LLM approaches often suffer from "bad reasoning" under implicit planning assumptions, we focus on settings in which the model must recover implicit attributes such as therapy type, added agents, endpoint roles, or follow-up status from partially observed clinical-trial tables. We propose SCOPE (Structured Clinical hybrid Planning for Evidence retrieval in clinical trials), a multi-LLM planner-based framework that decomposes the task into row selection, structured planning, and execution. The planner makes the source field, reasoning rules, and output constraints explicit before answer generation, reducing ambiguity relative to direct prompting. We evaluate SCOPE on 1,500 hybrid reasoning questions over oncology clinical-trial tables against zero-shot, few-shot, chain-of-thought, TableGPT2, Blend-SQL, and EHRAgent. Results show that explicit multi-LLM planning improves accuracy for reasoning-based questions while offering a stronger accuracy-efficiency tradeoff than heavier agentic baselines. Our findings position clinical trial reasoning as a distinct table understanding problem and highlight hybrid planner-based decomposition as an effective solution

We investigate whether explicit belief graphs improve LLM performance in cooperative multi-agent reasoning. Through 3,000+ controlled trials across four LLM families in the cooperative card game Hanabi, we establish four findings. First, integration architecture determines whether belief graphs provide value: as prompt context, graphs are decorative for strong models and beneficial only for weak models on 2nd-order Theory of Mind (80% vs 10%, p<0.0001, OR=36.0); when graphs gate action selection through ranked shortlists, they become structurally essential even for strong models (100% vs 20% on 2nd-order ToM, p<0.001). Second, we identify "Planner Defiance," a model-family-specific failure where LLMs override correct planner recommendations at partial competence (90% override, replicated N=20); Gemini models show near-zero defiance while Llama 70B shows 90%, and models distinguish factual context (deferred to) from advisory recommendations (overridden). Third, full-game evidence confirms inter-agent conventions (+128% over baseline, p=0.003) outperform all single-agent interventions, and individual belief-graph components must be combined to produce gains. Fourth, preliminary scaling analysis (N=10/cell, exploratory) suggests graph depth has diminishing returns: shallow graphs provide the best cost-benefit ratio, while deeper ToM graphs appear harmful at larger player counts (-1.5 pts at 5-player, p=0.029).

An assurance case is a structured argument document that justifies claims about a system's requirements or properties, which are supported by evidence. In regulated domains, these are crucial for meeting compliance and safety requirements to industry standards. We propose a graph diagnostic framework for analysing the structure and provenance of assurance cases. We focus on two main tasks: (1) link prediction, to learn and identify connections between argument elements, and (2) graph classification, to differentiate between assurance cases created by a state-of-the-art large language model and those created by humans, aiming to detect bias. We compiled a publicly available dataset of assurance cases, represented as graphs with nodes and edges, supporting both link prediction and provenance analysis. Experiments show that graph neural networks (GNNs) achieve strong link prediction performance (ROC-AUC 0.760) on real assurance cases and generalise well across domains and semi-supervised settings. For provenance detection, GNNs effectively distinguish human-authored from LLM-generated cases (F1 0.94). We observed that LLM-generated assurance cases have different hierarchical linking patterns compared to human-authored cases. Furthermore, existing GNN explanation methods show only moderate faithfulness, revealing a gap between predicted reasoning and the true argument structure.

Rising demand for mental health support has increased interest in using Large Language Models (LLMs) for counseling, but adapting them to this safety-critical domain is hindered by limited real-world data due to privacy constraints. Synthetic datasets provide a promising alternative, but existing approaches often rely on unstructured or semi-structured text inputs and overlook structural dependencies between a client's cognitive, emotional, and behavioral states, leading to psychologically inconsistent and less realistic interactions. We introduce Graph2Counsel, a framework for generating synthetic counseling sessions grounded in Client Psychological Graphs (CPGs) that encode relationships among clients' thoughts, emotions, and behaviors. Graph2Counsel uses a structured prompting pipeline guided by counselor strategies and CPG, and explores prompting strategies including CoT and Multi-Agent Feedback. It produces 760 sessions from 76 CPGs across diverse client profiles. In expert evaluation, our dataset outperforms prior datasets on specificity, counselor competence, authenticity, conversational flow, and safety (Krippendorff's $α$ = 0.70). Fine-tuning an open-source model on this dataset improves performance on several metrics on CounselingBench and CounselBench, while matching baselines on others. We further introduce Therapy-Eval, a multi-turn evaluation framework, and demonstrate the effectiveness of our fine-tuned model in realistic therapeutic conversations. We make our code, data and fine-tuned model public.

Communicating complex system designs or scientific processes through text alone is inefficient and prone to ambiguity. A system that automatically generates scientific architecture diagrams from text with high semantic fidelity can be useful in multiple applications like enterprise architecture visualization, AI-driven software design, and educational content creation. Hence, in this paper, we focus on leveraging language models to perform semantic understanding of the input text description to generate intermediate code that can be processed to generate high-fidelity architecture diagrams. Unfortunately, no clean large-scale open-access dataset exists, implying lack of any effective open models for this task. Hence, we contribute a comprehensive dataset, \system, comprising scientific architecture images, their corresponding textual descriptions, and associated DOT code representations. Leveraging this resource, we fine-tune a suite of small language models, and also perform in-context learning using GPT-4o. Through extensive experimentation, we show that \system{} models significantly outperform existing baseline models like DiagramAgent and perform at par with in-context learning-based generations from GPT-4o. We make the code, data and models publicly available.

Understanding climate change requires reasoning over complex causal networks. Yet, existing causal discovery datasets predominantly capture explicit, direct causal relations. We introduce ClimateCause, a manually expert-annotated dataset of higher-order causal structures from science-for-policy climate reports, including implicit and nested causality. Cause-effect expressions are normalized and disentangled into individual causal relations to facilitate graph construction, with unique annotations for cause-effect correlation, relation type, and spatiotemporal context. We further demonstrate ClimateCause's value for quantifying readability based on the semantic complexity of causal graphs underlying a statement. Finally, large language model benchmarking on correlation inference and causal chain reasoning highlights the latter as a key challenge.

Tractability tests are often computed from input syntax: support-graph treewidth, local coefficient patterns, backdoor tests, or action-count bounds. Before such a test can be lower-bounded or made algorithmic, it must define a predicate on the exact-certification problem itself. Equivalent presentations must receive the same verdict. The semantic object is the correctness quotient, whose classes are states with the same correct outputs. Correctness-preserving presentation moves generate closure orbits. A target that changes inside one closure orbit has an orbit gap and fails descent. Exact closure-invariant classification is possible exactly when the positive and negative orbit hulls are disjoint; the positive hull is then the least exact classifier, and computable orbit representatives make the classifier algorithmic. The results separate three layers. The descent layer gives orbit-gap obstructions for raw local syntax, raw action and coordinate counts, and raw support-graph predicates. The post-descent complexity layer applies ordinary reductions to descended objects: graph-predicate lower bounds transfer through action-gap graph extraction, and Action-Gap-Treewidth is NP-complete when the width bound is part of the input. The certification layer asks whether a proxy descends: for split proxies $b\wedge\varphi(z)$, SAT reduces to non-descent and UNSAT reduces to descent. Positive regimes use quotient-preserving normalizations or catalogues before model checking; bounded quotient size, bounded full Gaifman treewidth of the constructed quotient, sparse unary-gap certificates, and strict-margin perturbation balls give explicit cost bounds after quotient construction.

Generative AI can encode substantial medical knowledge, but patient-specific answers remain constrained by the context supplied at inference time. Electronic health records and FHIR support documentation and interoperability, but they do not by themselves define the complete, current, and auditable context a model should receive. Similarity-based retrieval can find related text, but it neither guarantees collection of clinically connected records nor makes omissions explicit. We introduce MedBeads, an AI-facing clinical record substrate that assembles a declared closure of longitudinal patient information before generation. A Bead is an immutable clinical or knowledge object identified by SHA-256 over canonical content and stored as an append-only frame in a patient-scoped Pod. Structural parent edges form a patient-rooted Merkle DAG. Typed clinical links occupy a separate, reconstructable interpretation layer derived from signed, versioned knowledge rules; they can be recomputed when knowledge changes without rewriting clinical facts. Retrieval follows authorized structural and clinical edges, resolves amendments and retractions, and reports policy or token truncation. An open-source Go implementation uses append-only Pods and reconstructable SQLite projections. File-based conversion of 1,135 synthetic Synthea FHIR bundles produced approximately one million Beads and demonstrated deterministic clinical-link derivation and interpretation-layer reconstruction. These engineering results establish feasibility and reproducibility, not reduced hallucination or improved clinical outcomes. MedBeads reframes grounding as a data-structure problem by delivering a policy-bounded, provenance-bearing clinical subgraph rather than an opaque list of similar fragments.

Large language models (LLMs) show strong reasoning via chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting, but the process is opaque, which makes verification, debugging, and control difficult in high-stakes settings. We present Vis-CoT, a human-in-the-loop framework that converts linear CoT text into an interactive reasoning graph. Users can visualize the logical flow, identify flawed steps, and intervene by pruning incorrect paths and grafting new, user-defined premises. This shifts interaction from passive observation to active collaboration, steering models toward more accurate and trustworthy conclusions. Across GSM8K and StrategyQA, Vis-CoT improves final-answer accuracy by up to 24 percentage points over non-interactive baselines. A user study also shows large gains in perceived usability and trust. Vis-CoT points to a practical path for more reliable, understandable, and collaborative reasoning by combining LLMs with targeted human oversight.

Vision and Language Navigation (VLN) requires an embodied agent to traverse complex environments by following natural language instructions, demanding accurate alignment between visual observations and linguistic guidance. To address these challenges, we propose a fine grained instruction guided graph reasoning framework (FIGR) that enhances both spatial representation and instruction understanding during navigation. Specifically, an observation graph interaction mechanism is introduced to disentangle angular and visual cues while strengthening directed edge representations through geometric embedding, enabling more reliable spatial reasoning within the navigation graph. The key detail guidance module is implemented as Adaptive Open Vocabulary Guidance (AOVG), where a contextual role parser dynamically identifies location, object, spatial relation, and other contextual cues. This design avoids exact string matching and supports previously unseen entities and compositional expressions. For multilingual instructions, a Multilingual Semantic Adapter (MSA) maps language-specific representations into a shared navigation-semantic space. By jointly integrating structured graph reasoning with instruction critical semantic cues, the proposed approach significantly improves the agent ability to follow complex navigation instructions. On the validation-unseen splits, FIGR achieves 67 SPL on R2R and 64.8 sDTW on RxR, exceeding SPENav by 1 percentage point in SPL and PRET by 2.4 points in sDTW, respectively.

Semantic reasoning aims to infer new knowledge from existing knowledge, with OWL ontologies serving as a standardized framework for organizing information. A key challenge in semantic reasoning is verifying ontology consistency. However, state-of-the-art reasoners are computationally expensive, and their efficiency decreases as ontology sizes grow. While classical machine learning models have been explored for consistency checking of A-Box axioms, considering T-Boxes remains unaddressed. Large language models (LLMs) have shown promising results for natural language inference but perform poorly on logical reasoning. The recently introduced Graph Language Model (GLM) offers a way to simultaneously process graph-structured data and text. This paper proposes GLaMoR (Graph Language Model for Reasoning), a reasoning pipeline that transforms OWL ontologies into graph-structured data and adapts the GLM architecture for consistency checking. We evaluate GLaMoR on ontologies from the NCBO BioPortal repository, converting them into triples suitable for model input. Our results show that the GLM outperforms all baseline models, achieving $95\%$ accuracy, and is $20$ times faster than classical reasoners.

Large reasoning models (LRMs) produce reasoning traces with non-linear structures, such as backtracking and self-correction, that complicate the evaluation and monitoring of the reasoning process. We introduce ReasoningFlow, a framework that captures the discourse structures of LRM reasoning traces into fine-grained directed acyclic graphs (DAGs). We develop and validate our annotation schema through careful manual annotation of 31 traces (2.1k steps), achieving high inter-annotator agreement, then scale to automatic annotation of 1,260 traces (247.7k steps) spanning three tasks (math, science, argumentation) and five models (Qwen2.5-32B-Inst, QwQ-32B, DeepSeek-V3, DeepSeek-R1, GPT-oss-120B). By analyzing ReasoningFlow graphs, we find: (1) LRMs exhibit structurally similar traces, despite being trained from different base models and potentially non-overlapping post-training data. (2) ReasoningFlow reveals diverse fine-grained reasoning behaviors (e.g., local verification, self-reflection, and assumptions) that can be used for better reasoning trace monitorability. (3) In LRMs, most of the erroneous steps are not used to derive final answers. (4) Mechanistic causal dependencies between steps do not reflect the language-level discourse structure. We release the dataset and code in: https://github.com/jinulee-v/reasoningflow.