Abstract:Logical reasoning consistently plays a fundamental and significant role in the domains of knowledge engineering and artificial intelligence. Recently, Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as a noteworthy innovation in natural language processing (NLP). However, the question of whether LLMs can effectively address the task of logical reasoning, which requires gradual cognitive inference similar to human intelligence, remains unanswered. To this end, we aim to bridge this gap and provide comprehensive evaluations in this paper. Firstly, to offer systematic evaluations, we select fifteen typical logical reasoning datasets and organize them into deductive, inductive, abductive and mixed-form reasoning settings. Considering the comprehensiveness of evaluations, we include 3 early-era representative LLMs and 4 trending LLMs. Secondly, different from previous evaluations relying only on simple metrics (e.g., \emph{accuracy}), we propose fine-level evaluations in objective and subjective manners, covering both answers and explanations, including \emph{answer correctness}, \emph{explain correctness}, \emph{explain completeness} and \emph{explain redundancy}. Additionally, to uncover the logical flaws of LLMs, problematic cases will be attributed to five error types from two dimensions, i.e., \emph{evidence selection process} and \emph{reasoning process}. Thirdly, to avoid the influences of knowledge bias and concentrate purely on benchmarking the logical reasoning capability of LLMs, we propose a new dataset with neutral content. Based on the in-depth evaluations, this paper finally forms a general evaluation scheme of logical reasoning capability from six dimensions (i.e., \emph{Correct}, \emph{Rigorous}, \emph{Self-aware}, \emph{Active}, \emph{Oriented} and \emph{No hallucination}). It reflects the pros and cons of LLMs and gives guiding directions for future works.

Characterizing Large Language Models as Rationalizers of Knowledge-intensive Tasks

Concise and Organized Perception Facilitates Large Language Models for Deductive Reasoning.

(Ir)rationality and Cognitive Biases in Large Language Models

Tailoring Self-Rationalizers with Multi-Reward Distillation

Knowledge-Augmented Reasoning Distillation for Small Language Models in Knowledge-Intensive Tasks

Argumentative Large Language Models for Explainable and Contestable Decision-Making

Rational Metareasoning for Large Language Models

From Data to Commonsense Reasoning: The Use of Large Language Models for Explainable AI

Are Large Language Models Really Good Logical Reasoners? A Comprehensive Evaluation and Beyond

Large Language Models as an Indirect Reasoner: Contrapositive and Contradiction for Automated Reasoning

Large Language Models Help Humans Verify Truthfulness -- Except When They Are Convincingly Wrong

Evaluating Consistency and Reasoning Capabilities of Large Language Models

Can Large Language Models Reason? A Characterization via 3-SAT

Large Language Models Assume People are More Rational than We Really are

Right for Right Reasons: Large Language Models for Verifiable Commonsense Knowledge Graph Question Answering

CLR-Fact: Evaluating the Complex Logical Reasoning Capability of Large Language Models over Factual Knowledge

Beyond Accuracy: Evaluating the Reasoning Behavior of Large Language Models -- A Survey

Comparing Rationality Between Large Language Models and Humans: Insights and Open Questions

A Systematic Analysis of Large Language Models as Soft Reasoners: The Case of Syllogistic Inferences

Large Language Models are In-context Teachers for Knowledge Reasoning