arXiv:2606. 24124v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multi-step reasoning with Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting remains fragile: logical errors or hallucinations in early steps silently propagate, producing confident but incorrect conclusions.
Summary generated by The Flow from the publisher's feed. The full article lives at arXiv AI.
arXiv:2607. 23019v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting enables large language models (LLMs) to tackle multi-step reasoning tasks, yet the generated intermediate steps are not guaranteed to be logically sound.
arXiv:2605. 19723v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Mathematical reasoning is essential for problem-solving in education, science, and industry, serving as a crucial benchmark for evaluating artificial intelligence systems.
arXiv:2604. 01993v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Multi-hop QA benchmarks often reward Large Language Models (LLMs) for spurious correctness, where models reach correct answers through invalid intermediate reasoning.
arXiv:2607. 14149v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Although large language models (LLMs) have set benchmarks for zero-shot reasoning, their deployment remains cost-prohibitive and environmentally taxing.
arXiv:2606. 05402v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large reasoning models (LRMs) produce reasoning traces with non-linear structures, such as backtracking and self-correction, that complicate the evaluation and monitoring of the reasoning process.
arXiv:2606. 16603v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM-based agents have demonstrated strong capabilities in data-intensive analytical tasks, yet their outputs are rarely verifiable: a reliance on linear text trajectories makes their reasoning difficult to audit.