REVIEW 3 cited by
Can Transformers Reason Logically? A Study in SAT Solving
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Can Transformers Reason Logically? A Study in SAT Solving
read the original abstract
We formally study the logical reasoning capabilities of decoder-only Transformers in the context of the boolean satisfiability (SAT) problem. First, we prove by construction that decoder-only Transformers can decide 3-SAT, in a non-uniform model of computation, using backtracking and deduction via Chain-of-Thought (CoT). %We prove its correctness by showing trace equivalence to the well-known DPLL SAT-solving algorithm. Second, we implement our construction as a PyTorch model with a tool (PARAT) that we designed to empirically demonstrate its correctness and investigate its properties. Third, rather than \textit{programming} a transformer to reason, we evaluate empirically whether it can be \textit{trained} to do so by learning directly from algorithmic traces (``reasoning paths'') from our theoretical construction. The trained models demonstrate strong out-of-distribution generalization on problem sizes seen during training but has limited length generalization, which is consistent with the implications of our theoretical result
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Learning How to Cube
A neuro-symbolic post-training pipeline lets a 4B transformer learn cubing heuristics that reach pass@5 of 53 on 100 SAT competition instances, matching the strongest symbolic baseline.
-
Large Lemma Miners: Can LLMs do Induction Proofs for Hardware?
A neurosymbolic method using two LLM prompting frameworks generates provably correct inductive arguments for 84% of a set of mid-size open-source RTL hardware designs.
-
Large Lemma Miners: Can LLMs do Induction Proofs for Hardware?
LLMs, verified by a symbolic model checker, produced correct inductive strengthenings for 82 of 94 curated RTL safety properties.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.