Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

LogicGame: Benchmarking Rule-Based Reasoning Abilities of Large Language Models

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 2408.15778 v4 pith:7JOPH3S4 submitted 2024-08-28 cs.AI cs.CL

classification cs.AIcs.CL
keywords reasoninglogicgamellmsmodelsrule-basedabilitiescapabilitiescomplex
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated notable capabilities across various tasks, showcasing complex problem-solving abilities. Understanding and executing complex rules, along with multi-step planning, are fundamental to logical reasoning and critical for practical LLM agents and decision-making systems. However, evaluating LLMs as effective rule-based executors and planners remains underexplored. In this paper, we introduce LogicGame, a novel benchmark designed to evaluate the comprehensive rule understanding, execution, and planning capabilities of LLMs. Unlike traditional benchmarks, LogicGame provides diverse games that contain a series of rules with an initial state, requiring models to comprehend and apply predefined regulations to solve problems. We create simulated scenarios in which models execute or plan operations to achieve specific outcomes. These game scenarios are specifically designed to distinguish logical reasoning from mere knowledge by relying exclusively on predefined rules. This separation allows for a pure assessment of rule-based reasoning capabilities. The evaluation considers not only final outcomes but also intermediate steps, providing a comprehensive assessment of model performance. Moreover, these intermediate steps are deterministic and can be automatically verified. LogicGame defines game scenarios with varying difficulty levels, from simple rule applications to complex reasoning chains, in order to offer a precise evaluation of model performance on rule understanding and multi-step execution. Utilizing LogicGame, we test various LLMs and identify notable shortcomings in their rule-based logical reasoning abilities.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Rethinking Reasoning Quality in Large Language Models through Enhanced Chain-of-Thought via RL

    cs.AI 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    DRER rewards CoT trajectories that increase the model's likelihood of the correct answer, plus a length penalty, and the new LogicTree benchmark reportedly lifts a 7B model's average accuracy from 0.13 to 0.60.

  2. PuzzleClone: A DSL-Powered Framework for Synthesizing Verifiable Data

    cs.AI 2025-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A DSL plus SMT solver generates and validates 83,657 logic puzzles, and fine-tuning on them improves a 7B model's scores on several reasoning benchmarks.

  3. BV-Blend: Uncertainty-Weighted Historical Baselines for Stable Critic-Free RL with Verifiable Rewards

    cs.AI 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    BV-Blend blends prompt-local and semantic-cluster historical reward statistics via SEM-derived weights to stabilize critic-free RL advantage estimation.

Pith tools