Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Beneath Surface Similarity: Large Language Models Make Reasonable Scientific Analogies after Structure Abduction

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

arxiv 2305.12660 v2 pith:YCCGT5R7 submitted 2023-05-22 cs.CL cs.AI

classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords analogiesanalogicalabductionreasoningstructurestructurestaskcognition
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

The vital role of analogical reasoning in human cognition allows us to grasp novel concepts by linking them with familiar ones through shared relational structures. Despite the attention previous research has given to word analogies, this work suggests that Large Language Models (LLMs) often overlook the structures that underpin these analogies, raising questions about the efficacy of word analogies as a measure of analogical reasoning skills akin to human cognition. In response to this, our paper introduces a task of analogical structure abduction, grounded in cognitive psychology, designed to abduce structures that form an analogy between two systems. In support of this task, we establish a benchmark called SCAR, containing 400 scientific analogies from 13 distinct fields, tailored for evaluating analogical reasoning with structure abduction. The empirical evidence underlines the continued challenges faced by LLMs, including ChatGPT and GPT-4, in mastering this task, signifying the need for future exploration to enhance their abilities.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Can LLMs Help Improve Analogical Reasoning For Strategic Decisions? Experimental Evidence from Humans and GPT-4

    cs.AI 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    GPT-4 showed high recall but low precision in analogical matching for strategic problems, while humans showed the reverse, implying complementary roles for AI and human judgment.

Pith tools