arXiv:2606. 00671v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We present AXIOM, a trust-first neuro-symbolic execution architecture for natural-language mathematical reasoning.
By Alessio Bruno
The paper introduces DRAGO, a framework that repairs formal specifications generated by large language models (LLMs) using deterministic, formalism‑specific diagnosis instead of ungrounded LLM critiques. DRAGO selectively rewrites specifications only when the diagnosed error weight decreases, reducing regressions from 11.8% to 1.3% and improving answer accuracy by 12.9 percentage points over zero‑shot formalization and 8.7 percentage points over LLM‑diagnostic repair across five benchmarks. Additionally, the authors identified and corrected rendering defects in Planetarium that caused half of its floor‑tile split instances to be inconsistent with reference formalizations.
By Giovanni Vaccarino, Emanuele La Malfa, Dehai Min, Hanrong Zhang, Pier Luca Lanzi, Lu Cheng, Michael J. Wooldridge, Philip S. Yu, Sara Bernardini
arXiv:2606. 19588v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Formal tools such as SAT and SMT solvers are increasingly embedded in language model reasoning pipelines when a safety or security critical question can be formulated in logic.
By Zunchen Huang, Songgaojun Deng
arXiv:2607. 13069v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models produce chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning that appears logically sound yet may not genuinely depend on its stated premises.
By Hironao Nakamura
The paper introduces SMTrap, a cost‑effective denial‑of‑service attack framework for large reasoning models that does not rely on model feedback or GPU resources. It uses conflict counts from an SMT solver to guide the creation of inference‑heavy constraint satisfaction problem queries, exploiting the models’ backtracking search to induce long output trajectories. Experiments on seven state‑of‑the‑art models show SMTrap achieves DoS effects several times stronger than existing methods, and the authors also present a mitigation tool that reduces token usage.
By Jian Yang, Zhenqi Feng, Zhaoyang Yu, Zhaoxin Fan, Kejian Wu, Xiaofeng Wang, Zheng Zhu, Jianjun Huang, Wei You, Bin Liang
arXiv:2607. 07391v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Mathematical reasoning benchmarks typically provide all facts needed to solve each problem, while interactive benchmarks often mix reasoning with tools, retrieval, and long-horizon dialogue.
By Charbel Al Bateh, Samer Saab Jr