arXiv AI
Jul 14
Filtered Reasoning Score: Evaluating Reasoning Quality on a Model's Most-Confident Traces
arXiv:2604. 11996v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Should we trust Large Language Models (LLMs) with high accuracy?
Measuring Reasoning Quality in LLMs: A Multi-Dimensional Behavioral Framework
arXiv:2605. 24661v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: LLMs have achieved remarkable success in complex reasoning tasks, yet current evaluation approaches predominantly rely on final-answer correctness, offering limited insight into the underlying reasoning processes that produce those answers.
Related stories
arXiv AI
Jun 2
ReasonBENCH: Benchmarking the (In)Stability of LLM Reasoning
arXiv:2512. 07795v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Benchmark scores for LLM reasoning systems are reported as single numbers, yet the same model, strategy, and task can produce meaningfully different answers and costs across repeated executions, even under greedy decoding (T = 0).
arXiv AI
Jun 10
The Confident Liar: Diagnosing Multi-Agent Debate with Log-Probabilities and LLM-as-Judge
arXiv:2606. 10296v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multi-agent debate systems are typically evaluated only on whether the final answer is correct, overlooking the quality of the intermediate reasoning that debate is designed to produce.
arXiv AI
Jul 10
Can We Trust LLM's Logic? Quantifying Uncertainty, Coherence, and Robustness via a Graph-Based Framework
arXiv:2607. 08017v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large-Language Models (LLMs) can be prone to flawed and unfaithful reasoning that decoding strategies like Self-Consistency (SC) fail to detect as they evaluate only final-answer agreement while ignoring the logical validity of intermediate steps.
arXiv AI
5d ago
Reasoning Jury: Multi-Model Consensus for Evaluating Reasoning Traces
arXiv:2608. 12585v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Improving reasoning LLMs requires the ability to judge the quality of long reasoning traces for effective reasoning data curation, strong training signals during reinforcement learning, and an in-depth understanding of reasoning behaviors during model performance evaluation.
arXiv AI
Jun 15
C2-Faith: Benchmarking LLM Judges for Causal and Coverage Faithfulness in Chain-of-Thought Reasoning
arXiv:2603. 05167v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as judges of chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning, yet it remains unclear whether they can reliably assess process faithfulness rather than merely answer plausibility.
arXiv AI
Aug 11
SymboUQ: Symbolic Uncertainty Quantification for Spatial Reasoning in LLMs
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.
arXiv AI
Jul 15
Rethinking Reward Models for Multi-Domain Test-Time Scaling
arXiv:2510. 00492v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The reliability of large language models (LLMs) during test-time scaling is often assessed with \emph{external verifiers} or \emph{reward models} that distinguish correct reasoning from flawed logic.
arXiv AI
Aug 11
SymDiag: Explainable Diagnosis for LLM Reasoning via Neuro-Symbolic Verification
arXiv:2608. 08786v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) increasingly serve as data-driven reasoners, yet their chains-of-thought (CoT) can be unfaithful even when final answers are correct.
arXiv AI
5d ago
ReflectFact: Self-Reflective Agents for Improving Comprehension and Reasoning in Multi-Hop Fact Verification
arXiv:2608. 12877v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multi-hop fact verification, which verifies claims by reasoning over multiple pieces of evidence, is critical for combating misinformation on social media yet remains highly challenging.
arXiv AI
Jun 16
VibeThinker-3B: Exploring the Frontier of Verifiable Reasoning in Small Language Models
arXiv:2606. 16140v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: This technical report introduces VibeThinker-3B, a compact dense model with 3B parameters developed to investigate how far verifiable reasoning can be pushed within a strictly small-model regime.
arXiv AI
Jun 10
RealMath-Eval: Why SOTA Judges Struggle with Real Human Reasoning
arXiv:2606. 10254v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: While Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved near-perfect performance in \emph{solving} high-school mathematics, their ability to \emph{evaluate} the diverse reasoning processes of real human students remains under-examined.