Evaluating Large Language Models on the Frame and Symbol Grounding Problems: A Zero-shot Benchmark

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2506.07896v1
• Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2025 16:12:47 GMT
• Title: Evaluating Large Language Models on the Frame and Symbol Grounding Problems: A Zero-shot Benchmark
• Authors: Shoko Oka,
• Abstract summary: The Frame Problem and the Symbol Grounding Problem have historically been viewed as unsolvable within traditional symbolic AI systems.<n>This study investigates whether modern LLMs possess the cognitive capacities required to address these problems.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have revitalized philosophical debates surrounding artificial intelligence. Two of the most fundamental challenges - namely, the Frame Problem and the Symbol Grounding Problem - have historically been viewed as unsolvable within traditional symbolic AI systems. This study investigates whether modern LLMs possess the cognitive capacities required to address these problems. To do so, I designed two benchmark tasks reflecting the philosophical core of each problem, administered them under zero-shot conditions to 13 prominent LLMs (both closed and open-source), and assessed the quality of the models' outputs across five trials each. Responses were scored along multiple criteria, including contextual reasoning, semantic coherence, and information filtering. The results demonstrate that while open-source models showed variability in performance due to differences in model size, quantization, and instruction tuning, several closed models consistently achieved high scores. These findings suggest that select modern LLMs may be acquiring capacities sufficient to produce meaningful and stable responses to these long-standing theoretical challenges.

Related papers

• SwS: Self-aware Weakness-driven Problem Synthesis in Reinforcement Learning for LLM Reasoning [95.28059121743831]
  Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has proven effective for training large language models (LLMs) on complex reasoning tasks.<n>We introduce a Self-aware Weakness-driven problem Synthesis framework (SwS) that systematically identifies model deficiencies and leverages them for problem augmentation.<n>SwS enables robust generalization byempowering the model to self-identify and address its weaknesses in RL, yielding average performance gains of 10.0% and 7.7% on 7B and 32B models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-10T17:02:00Z)
• Impact of Noise on LLM-Models Performance in Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (ARC) Tasks with Model Temperature Considerations [4.39614901077936]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have generated growing interest in their structured reasoning capabilities.<n>The Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus benchmark plays a crucial role in evaluating these capabilities by testing how well AI models generalize to novel problems.<n>This work underscores the need for developing more robust and adaptable AI systems capable of handling the ambiguity and variability inherent in real-world scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-22T13:43:58Z)
• LLM-ProS: Analyzing Large Language Models' Performance in Competitive Problem Solving [1.5106583432923495]
  This paper introduces a novel evaluation technique, LLM-ProS, to assess the performance of state-of-the-art LLMs.<n>Using a curated dataset of 166 World Finals problems from 2011 to 2024, we benchmark the models' reasoning, accuracy, and efficiency.<n>Our results reveal significant differences in the models' abilities to generalize, adapt, and solve novel problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-04T18:55:14Z)
• Self-Evolving Critique Abilities in Large Language Models [59.861013614500024]
  This paper explores enhancing critique abilities of Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>We introduce SCRIT, a framework that trains LLMs with self-generated data to evolve their critique abilities.<n>Our analysis reveals that SCRIT's performance scales positively with data and model size.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-10T05:51:52Z)
• What's Wrong with Your Code Generated by Large Language Models? An Extensive Study [80.18342600996601]
  Large language models (LLMs) produce code that is shorter yet more complicated as compared to canonical solutions. We develop a taxonomy of bugs for incorrect codes that includes three categories and 12 sub-categories, and analyze the root cause for common bug types. We propose a novel training-free iterative method that introduces self-critique, enabling LLMs to critique and correct their generated code based on bug types and compiler feedback.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-08T17:27:17Z)
• MR-Ben: A Meta-Reasoning Benchmark for Evaluating System-2 Thinking in LLMs [55.20845457594977]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown increasing capability in problem-solving and decision-making.<n>We present a process-based benchmark MR-Ben that demands a meta-reasoning skill.<n>Our meta-reasoning paradigm is especially suited for system-2 slow thinking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T03:50:23Z)
• Investigating Symbolic Capabilities of Large Language Models [16.88906206735967]
  This study aims to bridge the gap by rigorously evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs) on a series of symbolic tasks. Our analysis encompasses eight LLMs, including four enterprise-grade and four open-source models, of which three have been pre-trained on mathematical tasks. The findings reveal a significant decline in LLMs' performance on context-free and context-sensitive symbolic tasks as the complexity, represented by the number of symbols, increases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-21T21:24:34Z)
• Evaluating LLMs' Mathematical and Coding Competency through Ontology-guided Interventions [47.83142414018448]
  We focus on two popular reasoning tasks: arithmetic reasoning and code generation. We introduce (i) a general ontology of perturbations for math and coding questions, (ii) a semi-automatic method to apply these perturbations, and (iii) two datasets. We show a significant performance drop across all the models against perturbed questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-17T18:13:07Z)
• Competition-Level Problems are Effective LLM Evaluators [121.15880285283116]
  This paper aims to evaluate the reasoning capacities of large language models (LLMs) in solving recent programming problems in Codeforces. We first provide a comprehensive evaluation of GPT-4's peiceived zero-shot performance on this task, considering various aspects such as problems' release time, difficulties, and types of errors encountered. Surprisingly, theThoughtived performance of GPT-4 has experienced a cliff like decline in problems after September 2021 consistently across all the difficulties and types of problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-04T18:58:57Z)

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.