arXiv:2606. 06635v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Failures in language model reasoning emerge through distinct processes that leave identifiable signatures in the reasoning trace.
By Tanvi Thoria, Kiana Jafari, Marc R. Schlichting, Mykel J. Kochenderfer
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.
By Wenyao Cui, Huaping Zhang, Yongyi Huang, Qiuchi Li, Jian Xu, Cheng-Lin Liu, Chunxiao Gao, Juan Wang, Baohua Zhang
The paper introduces DCFA, a training‑free framework for attributing failures in large language model‑based multi‑agent systems. DCFA uses a global module to build causal‑inspired dependency graphs from system traces, pinpointing the earliest decisive error, and a local module that refines this attribution through counterfactual reasoning. Experiments on the Who&When benchmark across six LLMs demonstrate that DCFA improves step‑level accuracy by up to 8.27% over existing baselines.
By Zehao Wang, Lanjun Wang, Shilong Jin, Junjie Chen, Yanghua Xiao
arXiv:2603. 05290v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) achieve promising performance, yet their ability to reason remains poorly understood.
By Tianxi Gao, Yufan Cai, Yusi Yuan, Jin Song Dong
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: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.
By Avni Mittal, Rauno Arike