The paper introduces a neuro‑symbolic framework for scientific reasoning that separates symbolic validity and semantic groundedness. A deterministic symbolic verifier acts as a hard filter to guarantee syntactic and arithmetic correctness, while a Process Reward Model (PRM) is trained on verifier‑accepted steps to assess contextual grounding. The authors propose Counterfactual Symbolic Perturbation (CSP) to generate hard negative examples that pass the verifier but are logically flawed, enabling efficient PRM training and a verifier‑first constrained search at inference.
By Yuxin Zi, Cong Xu, Suparna Bhattacharya, Martin Foltin, Amit Sheth
arXiv:2609.21492v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning has been shown to improve the performance of large language models (LLMs), yet existing optimization methods largely r...
By Jingyu Hu, Shu Yang, Weiru Liu, Di Wang
arXiv:2607. 23019v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting enables large language models (LLMs) to tackle multi-step reasoning tasks, yet the generated intermediate steps are not guaranteed to be logically sound.
By Zirong Chen, Meiyi Ma
arXiv:2507. 09751v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities in natural language understanding and generation, but exhibit problems with logical consistency in their output.
By Bradley P. Allen, Prateek Chhikara, Thomas Macaulay Ferguson, Filip Ilievski, Paul Groth
arXiv:2608. 00417v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Although large language models (LLMs) can produce fluent spatial reasoning traces, their intermediate relations may fail to support the final conclusion, making token-level confidence insufficient for final-answer reliability estimation.
By Dahai Yu, Lin Jiang, Rongchao Xu, Guang Wang
arXiv:2607. 23055v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting can fail severely on constraint-dense logical reasoning tasks, where unverified errors accumulate silently across steps.
By Aida Usmanova, Rui Gao, Dilshod Azizov, Ricardo Usbeck, Zangir Iklassov
arXiv:2602. 18905v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong capabilities in complex reasoning tasks, yet their decision-making processes remain difficult to interpret.
By Yujiao Yang
arXiv:2608. 03291v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning improves large language model (LLM) performance while also providing an observable interface to the model's reasoning process.
By Shashwat Sourav, Aishwarya Balwani
arXiv:2608. 19009v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly paired with verifiers (step checkers, self-consistency filters, tool-based fact checkers, formal proof assistants) that claim to detect the model's errors.
By Yajie Yin
arXiv:2606. 08728v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Mathematical reasoning has long served as a stringent test of machine intelligence; over the past decade, it has moved from a niche problem within NLP to one of the most consequential AI frontiers.
By Syed Rifat Raiyan, Mohsinul Kabir, Hasan Mahmud, Md Kamrul Hasan
arXiv:2607. 26102v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Mathematical chain of thought (CoT) evaluation is commonly reduced to whether the final answer matches a reference.
By Vivek Shukla, Varun Shukla, Atul, Divya Mishra, Mehul Kumar Das
arXiv:2606. 16603v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM-based agents have demonstrated strong capabilities in data-intensive analytical tasks, yet their outputs are rarely verifiable: a reliance on linear text trajectories makes their reasoning difficult to audit.
By Jiajie Jin, Zhao Yang, Wenle Liao, Yuyang Hu, Guanting Dong, Xiaoxi Li, Yutao Zhu, Zhicheng Dou