arXiv AI

Hidden Language Consistency Phenomena in Reasoning LLMs

arXiv:2608. 08447v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multilingual reasoning models are commonly evaluated by whether they arrive at the correct answer, but not by whether they preserve the intended language while reasoning and responding.

arXiv Computation and Language
Aug 27

Rethinking the Multilingual Reasoning Gap with Layer Swap

The study investigates the performance gap between native-language reasoning and English-pivoted reasoning in large language models. By creating extensive multilingual reasoning datasets and fine‑tuning specialists on Qwen/Qwen3-8B-Base, the authors find that the native reasoning gap is much smaller (1.9–3.5%) than previously reported. They analyze weight‑space changes, discover a language‑agnostic reasoning core in the middle layers, and propose a Layer Swap technique that transfers these mid‑layer updates from an English specialist to native specialists, effectively closing most of the gap while maintaining native chain‑of‑thought output.

By Maxence Lasbordes, Am\'elie Chatelain, Djam\'e Seddah
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 7

Choosing the Right Language Mode at Inference Time for Multilingual Reliability

The paper investigates how multilingual large language models can be guided to reason more reliably in low- to mid-resource languages by selecting appropriate language modes during inference. Experiments with LLaMA and Qwen models show that using English context can correct errors from non‑English comprehension, but adding redundant bilingual context can cause interference. To balance this trade‑off, the authors propose Reliability‑Aware Adaptive Inference (RAAI), a training‑free test‑time framework that routes prompts based on Expected Calibration Error and gates reasoning with a mid‑layer Risk Index, achieving up to 37.7% accuracy gains and reduced calibration error on low‑resource languages.

By Ekata Mitra, Ameeta Agrawal
arXiv AI
Aug 17

The Metacognitive Bottleneck: Japanese Riddles Reveal Fundamental Limits of Machine Insight and Self-Evaluation in Reasoning AI

arXiv:2509. 14704v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Benchmark saturation and training-data contamination increasingly obscure whether reported gains in large language models (LLMs) reflect genuine advances in reasoning or familiarity with recurring patterns in benchmark problems.

By Masaharu Mizumoto, Dat Nguyen, Zhiheng Han, Xingfu Li, Yo Nakawake, Le Minh Nguyen
arXiv AI
Jul 24

Representation Robustness Under Executable Reasoning Constraints in Large Language Models for Mathematical Problem Solving

arXiv:2607. 20520v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly evaluated on mathematical problem solving, yet prior work often treats representationally equivalent formulations as interchangeable and conflates reasoning errors with interface failures.

By Sagnik Nath, Edith Aurora Graf, Liang Zhang, Diego Zapata-Rivera
arXiv AI
Sep 10

LogicSkills: A Structured Benchmark for Formal Reasoning in Large Language Models

LogicSkills is a benchmark designed to isolate three core logical abilities in large language models: formal symbolization, countermodel construction, and validity assessment. The dataset draws items from the two-variable fragment of first‑order logic without identity, presented in both English and a Carrollian nonce‑word language, and all instances are solver‑verified with Z3. Results show that conventional instruction‑tuned LLMs excel at validity assessment but struggle with symbolization and countermodel construction, whereas recent reasoning‑tuned models perform well across all tasks, indicating a more systematic logical skill profile.

By Brian Rabern, Philipp Mondorf, Barbara Plank
arXiv AI
Aug 12

From Reasoning Depth to Reasoning Breadth: Evaluating Multi-Point Associative Reasoning in Large Language Models

arXiv:2608. 10444v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have made substantial progress on reasoning tasks that require increasingly long and complex inferential chains.

By Si'an Xie (Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications), Jiaxun Liu (Peking University), Biao Yang (Kuaishou Technology), Wei Yuan (Kuaishou Technology), Fan Yang (Kuaishou Technology), Tingting Gao (Kuaishou Technology), Ming Wu (Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications)