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.

Enhancing Logical Reasoning in Large Language Models to Facilitate Legal Applications

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

Can Large Language Models Grasp Legal Theories? Enhance Legal Reasoning with Insights from Multi-Agent Collaboration

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

Logic-LM: Empowering Large Language Models with Symbolic Solvers for Faithful Logical Reasoning

Reason from Fallacy: Enhancing Large Language Models' Logical Reasoning through Logical Fallacy Understanding

LLM2: Let Large Language Models Harness System 2 Reasoning

Logic-of-Thought: Injecting Logic into Contexts for Full Reasoning in Large Language Models

Enhancing Zero-Shot Chain-of-Thought Reasoning in Large Language Models through Logic

Language Models Can Be Logical Solvers

Reasoning with Large Language Models, a Survey

Can Large Language Models Act as Symbolic Reasoners?

Enhancing Reasoning Capabilities of LLMs via Principled Synthetic Logic Corpus

Can LLMs Reason with Rules? Logic Scaffolding for Stress-Testing and Improving LLMs

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

LogicAsker: Evaluating and Improving the Logical Reasoning Ability of Large Language Models

Do Large Language Models Understand Logic or Just Mimick Context?

Argumentative Large Language Models for Explainable and Contestable Decision-Making

A Principled Framework for Knowledge-enhanced Large Language Model

LLMs for Relational Reasoning: How Far are We?

Are LLMs Rigorous Logical Reasoner? Empowering Natural Language Proof Generation with Contrastive Stepwise Decoding