analiza aiqbench
This paper introduces LogicSkills, a rigorous benchmark designed to dissect specific formal reasoning capabilities—symbolization, countermodel construction, and validity assessment—in large language models. Results reveal that while conventional instruction-tuned models excel at surface-level validity checks, they struggle significantly with the underlying logical mechanics required for robust reasoning. The study highlights a critical gap where high task accuracy masks deficiencies in core logical skills, suggesting that future model improvements must focus on systematic logical training rather than just output correctness.
LogicSkills: A Structured Benchmark for Formal Reasoning in Large Language Models
arXiv:2602.06533v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models perform well on many logical reasoning benchmarks, but it remains unclear which core logical skills they truly master. To address this, we introduce LogicSkills, a benchmark that isolates three fundamental logical skills: (i) $\textit{formal symbolization}\unicode{x2014}{}$translating premises into first-order logic; (ii) $\textit{countermodel construction}\unicode{x2014}$showing that an argument is logically invalid by constructing a finite countermodel; and (iii) $\textit{validity assessment}\unicode{x2014}$determining whether a conclusion follows from a set of premises. Items are drawn from the two-variable fragment of first-order logic without identity and are presented in both English and a Carrollian nonce-word language. All instances are solver-verified with Z3 for correctness and non-triviality. Across conventional instruction-tuned LLMs, performance is high on $\textit{validity assessment}$ but substantially lower on $\textit{formal symbolization}$ and $\textit{countermodel construction}$, highlighting that high task-level accuracy can mask weaknesses in core logical skills. In contrast, recent reasoning-tuned models perform strongly across all three tasks, suggesting a more systematic logical skill profile.
Abstract:Large language models perform well on many logical reasoning benchmarks, but it remains unclear which core logical skills they truly master. To address this, we introduce LogicSkills, a benchmark that isolates three fundamental logical skills: (i) $\textit{formal symbolization}\unicode{x2014}{}$translating premises into first-order logic; (ii) $\textit{countermodel construction}\unicode{x2014}$showing that an argument is logically invalid by constructing a finite countermodel; and (iii) $\textit{validity assessment}\unicode{x2014}$determining whether a conclusion follows from a set of premises. Items are drawn from the two-variable fragment of first-order logic without identity and are presented in both English and a Carrollian nonce-word language. All instances are solver-verified with Z3 for correctness and non-triviality. Across conventional instruction-tuned LLMs, performance is high on $\textit{validity assessment}$ but substantially lower on $\textit{formal symbolization}$ and $\textit{countermodel construction}$, highlighting that high task-level accuracy can mask weaknesses in core logical skills. In contrast, recent reasoning-tuned models perform strongly across all three tasks, suggesting a more systematic logical skill profile.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL)
arXiv:2602.06533 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2602.06533v3 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2602.06533 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 247 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
Links #5: 2026/07
LessWrong · 31 iul. 2026
The J-Space Debate, Agent Swarms, and Pacing Frontier AI - Digital Minds Newsletter #4
LessWrong · 18 sept. 2026

[AINews] not much happened today
Latent Space · 18 sept. 2026

World Models and Yann LeCun’s Bet Against Large Language Models
Quantum Zeitgeist · 17 iul. 2026