CauseJudger: Identifying the Cause with LLMs for Abductive Logical Reasoning

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2409.05559v1
• Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2024 12:30:43 GMT
• Title: CauseJudger: Identifying the Cause with LLMs for Abductive Logical Reasoning
• Authors: Jinwei He, Feng Lu,
• Abstract summary: We propose a new framework for abductive logical reasoning called CauseJudger (CJ) CJ identifies the authenticity of possible cause by transforming thinking from reverse to forward and removing irrelevant information. Our experiments show the efficiency of CJ with overall experiments and ablation experiments as well as case studies on our dataset and reconstructed public dataset.
• Score: 7.893032104130882
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have been utilized in solving diverse reasoning tasks, encompassing common sense, arithmetic and deduction tasks. However, with difficulties of reversing thinking patterns and irrelevant premises, how to determine the authenticity of the cause in abductive logical reasoning remains underexplored. Inspired by hypothesis and verification method and identification of irrelevant information in human thinking process, we propose a new framework for LLMs abductive logical reasoning called CauseJudger (CJ), which identifies the authenticity of possible cause by transforming thinking from reverse to forward and removing irrelevant information. In addition, we construct an abductive logical reasoning dataset for decision task called CauseLogics, which contains 200,000 tasks of varying reasoning lengths. Our experiments show the efficiency of CJ with overall experiments and ablation experiments as well as case studies on our dataset and reconstructed public dataset. Notably, CJ's implementation is efficient, requiring only two calls to LLM. Its impact is profound: when using gpt-3.5, CJ achieves a maximum correctness improvement of 41% compared to Zero-Shot-CoT. Moreover, with gpt-4, CJ attains an accuracy exceeding 90% across all datasets.

Related papers

• Verifying Large Language Models' Reasoning Paths via Correlation Matrix Rank [71.09032766271493]
  Large language models (LLMs) are prone to errors and hallucinations.<n>How to check their outputs effectively and efficiently has become a critical problem in their applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-28T11:01:10Z)
• Making Mathematical Reasoning Adaptive [61.45161826629692]
  We propose the AdaR framework to enable adaptive reasoning in large language models (LLMs)<n>AdaR synthesizes logically equivalent queries by varying variable values, and trains models with RLVR on these data to penalize spurious logic.<n> Experimental results demonstrate that AdaR improves robustness and generalization, achieving substantial improvement in mathematical reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-06T09:30:05Z)
• Mitigating Hallucinations in Large Language Models via Causal Reasoning [16.830640147232295]
  Large language models (LLMs) exhibit logically inconsistent hallucinations that appear coherent yet violate reasoning principles.<n>We introduce causal-DAG construction and reasoning (CDCR-SFT)<n>CDCR-SFT trains LLMs to explicitly construct variable-level directed acyclic graph (DAG) and then perform reasoning over it.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-17T20:51:06Z)
• Code Execution as Grounded Supervision for LLM Reasoning [36.97199200274124]
  Training large language models with chain-of-thought (CoT) supervision has proven effective for enhancing their reasoning abilities.<n>We propose a scalable method for generating a high-quality CoT supervision dataset by leveraging the determinism of program execution.<n>Our approach extracts verifiable, step-by-step reasoning traces from code execution and transforms them into a natural language CoT reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-12T04:36:57Z)
• SEAL: Steerable Reasoning Calibration of Large Language Models for Free [58.190800043449336]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated compelling capabilities for complex reasoning tasks via the extended chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning mechanism. Recent studies reveal substantial redundancy in the CoT reasoning traces, which negatively impacts model performance. We introduce SEAL, a training-free approach that seamlessly calibrates the CoT process, improving accuracy while demonstrating significant efficiency gains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-07T02:42:07Z)
• COLD: Causal reasOning in cLosed Daily activities [7.782872276680731]
  We propose the COLD (Causal reasOning in cLosed Daily activities) framework. It is built upon human understanding of daily real-world activities to reason about the causal nature of events. We show that the proposed framework facilitates the creation of enormous causal queries.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-29T06:37:13Z)
• Leveraging LLMs for Hypothetical Deduction in Logical Inference: A Neuro-Symbolic Approach [11.400815134634016]
  We introduce LINA, a neuro-symbolic approach for faithful logical reasoning. By enabling an LLM to autonomously perform the transition from propositional logic extraction to sophisticated logical reasoning, LINA bolsters the resilience of the reasoning process. Empirical evaluations demonstrate that LINA substantially outperforms both established propositional logic frameworks and conventional prompting techniques.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-29T06:38:46Z)
• Logic-of-Thought: Injecting Logic into Contexts for Full Reasoning in Large Language Models [9.689096888732642]
  We propose Logic-of-Thought (LoT) prompting which employs propositional logic to generate expanded logical information descriptions. LoT boosts the performance of various prompting methods with a striking margin across five logical reasoning tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-26T04:59:45Z)
• Multi-LogiEval: Towards Evaluating Multi-Step Logical Reasoning Ability of Large Language Models [46.26140720993383]
  Multi-LogiEval is a comprehensive evaluation dataset encompassing multi-step logical reasoning with various inference rules and depths. We conduct evaluations on a range of Large Language Models including GPT-4, ChatGPT, Gemini-Pro, Yi, Orca, and Mistral.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-24T23:02:56Z)
• Information Re-Organization Improves Reasoning in Large Language Models [22.2946033364035]
  We propose an information re-organization (InfoRE) method to enhance the reasoning ability of large language models (LLMs) Our method involves extracting logical relationships from the contextual content, such as documents or paragraphs, and subsequently pruning redundant content to minimize noise. To demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach in improving the reasoning ability, we conduct experiments using Llama2-70B, GPT-3.5, and GPT-4 on various contextually aware multi-hop reasoning tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-22T08:47:27Z)
• Direct Evaluation of Chain-of-Thought in Multi-hop Reasoning with Knowledge Graphs [52.42505579545893]
  Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate strong reasoning abilities when prompted to generate chain-of-thought explanations alongside answers. We propose a novel discriminative and generative CoT evaluation paradigm to assess LLMs' knowledge of reasoning and the accuracy of the generated CoT.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-17T05:22:56Z)
• Large Language Models as an Indirect Reasoner: Contrapositive and Contradiction for Automated Reasoning [74.90592233107712]
  We propose a Direct-Indirect Reasoning (DIR) method, which considers Direct Reasoning (DR) and Indirect Reasoning (IR) as multiple parallel reasoning paths that are merged to derive the final answer. Our DIR method is simple yet effective and can be straightforwardly integrated with existing variants of CoT methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-06T03:41:12Z)
• LogicAsker: Evaluating and Improving the Logical Reasoning Ability of Large Language Models [63.14196038655506]
  We introduce LogicAsker, a novel approach for evaluating and enhancing the logical reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) Our methodology reveals significant gaps in LLMs' learning of logical rules, with identified reasoning failures ranging from 29% to 90% across different models. We leverage these findings to construct targeted demonstration examples and fine-tune data, notably enhancing logical reasoning in models like GPT-4o by up to 5%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-01T13:53:53Z)
• A Closer Look at the Self-Verification Abilities of Large Language Models in Logical Reasoning [73.77088902676306]
  We take a closer look at the self-verification abilities of large language models (LLMs) in the context of logical reasoning. Our main findings suggest that existing LLMs could struggle to identify fallacious reasoning steps accurately and may fall short of guaranteeing the validity of self-verification methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-14T07:13:10Z)
• Language Models can be Logical Solvers [99.40649402395725]
  We introduce LoGiPT, a novel language model that directly emulates the reasoning processes of logical solvers. LoGiPT is fine-tuned on a newly constructed instruction-tuning dataset derived from revealing and refining the invisible reasoning process of deductive solvers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-10T16:23:50Z)
• DetermLR: Augmenting LLM-based Logical Reasoning from Indeterminacy to Determinacy [76.58614128865652]
  We propose DetermLR, a novel perspective that rethinks the reasoning process as an evolution from indeterminacy to determinacy. First, we categorize known conditions into two types: determinate and indeterminate premises This provides an oveall direction for the reasoning process and guides LLMs in converting indeterminate data into progressively determinate insights. We automate the storage and extraction of available premises and reasoning paths with reasoning memory, preserving historical reasoning details for subsequent reasoning steps.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-28T10:05:51Z)
• Towards LogiGLUE: A Brief Survey and A Benchmark for Analyzing Logical Reasoning Capabilities of Language Models [56.34029644009297]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated the ability to overcome various limitations of formal Knowledge Representation (KR) systems. LLMs excel most in abductive reasoning, followed by deductive reasoning, while they are least effective at inductive reasoning. We study single-task training, multi-task training, and "chain-of-thought" knowledge distillation fine-tuning technique to assess the performance of model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-02T01:00:50Z)
• Causal Reasoning and Large Language Models: Opening a New Frontier for Causality [29.433401785920065]
  Large language models (LLMs) can generate causal arguments with high probability. LLMs may be used by human domain experts to save effort in setting up a causal analysis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-28T19:00:43Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.