arXiv AI
Aug 25
Walking on the DARKSIDE
arXiv:2608.23370v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) recognise patterns but do not natively track the path of exclusions that a coherent discourse demands. When an input rests...
Not What You Meant: Can LLMs Follow a Specified Negation Semantics?
The paper investigates how large language models (LLMs) interpret negation across different logical semantics—open‑world vs. closed‑world, two‑ vs. three‑valued, and credulous vs. skeptical reasoning. Using the newly introduced NAFBench, a procedural generator that creates solver‑certified logic programs and their natural‑language verbalizations, the authors evaluate LLMs on four semantic viewpoints (SLDNF, well‑founded semantics, and stable‑model semantics). Results show a persistent gap: even the strongest models achieve only 59–74% accuracy, with many models sensitive to rule ordering and prone to overcommitment on undefined cases, though some frontier models reach near‑perfect performance on a fixed‑complexity set. "whyItMatters":"The study highlights that current LLMs struggle to reliably follow explicitly specified negation semantics, underscoring a limitation in their logical reasoning capabilities."
Related stories
arXiv AI
Jun 9
Sound and Complete Neurosymbolic Reasoning with LLM-Grounded Interpretations
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.
arXiv AI
Jul 28
Confidently Wrong: Exception Chain Collapse in Frontier LLM Rule Evaluation
arXiv:2607. 23386v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We document a failure class in frontier large language models -- exception chain collapse -- observed in eligibility evaluation under nested conditional rules of the form "A is required UNLESS B applies, UNLESS C overrides B".
arXiv AI
Jun 16
Know Your Limits : On the Faithfulness of LLMs as Solvers and Autoformalizers in Legal Reasoning
arXiv:2606. 16118v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) achieve strong performance on reasoning tasks, but whether this reflects faithful logical inference or heuristic approximation remains unclear.
arXiv AI
Jun 18
DeFAb: A Verifiable Benchmark for Defeasible Abduction in Foundation Models
arXiv:2606. 18557v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: A rule-based logic solver resolves every instance in our benchmark in under 50 microseconds with 100% accuracy; the best frontier language model reaches 65% at best and drops to 23.
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
Sep 12
SemVerBench: Benchmarking LLM Comprehension of Version-Constraint Resolution Semantics
SemVerBench is a benchmark that evaluates how well large language models (LLMs) understand and apply version-constraint resolution semantics, such as determining whether a version satisfies constraints like ^1.2.3 or >=2.0. The study finds that many models struggle with certain corner cases, with GPT‑5.1 performing poorly while Claude and Opus perform much better. The authors suggest that the failures stem from an activation/application gap rather than a lack of knowledge, and recommend that coding agents delegate version resolution to a dedicated resolver tool.
arXiv AI
Aug 12
AXIOM: A Trust-First Neuro-Symbolic Execution Architecture for Self-Explaining Mathematical Reasoning
arXiv:2606. 00671v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: We present AXIOM, a trust-first neuro-symbolic architecture for natural-language mathematical reasoning.
arXiv AI
Aug 11
Reproducing and Stress-Testing Two Approaches to LLM Reasoning Reliability: Test-Time Probability Aggregation and Logic-Representation Editing
arXiv:2608. 08514v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We independently reproduce two recent methods for making large language model (LLM) reasoning more reliable, and stress-test them across domains and models (RPC across four new task domains with Qwen3-8B, LCF across four 7-8B models).
arXiv AI
Jun 2
AXIOM: A Trust-First Neuro-Symbolic Execution Architecture for Verifiable Mathematical Reasoning
arXiv:2606. 00671v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We present AXIOM, a trust-first neuro-symbolic execution architecture for natural-language mathematical reasoning.
arXiv AI
Aug 3
ModelEquivBench: Certifying Multi-Relational Evaluation of LLM-Generated Optimization Models
arXiv:2607. 29431v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models increasingly generate optimization models from natural language, but existing evaluation often reduces a generated model and its ground truth to a single equivalent/not-equivalent verdict or an execution-success rate--labels that are neither independently checkable nor faithful to the multiple distinct senses in which two formulations can agree.
arXiv AI
Aug 5
The Tell-Tale Trace: Detecting Reasoning Failures in LLMs Using Chain-of-Thought Dynamics
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.