Large Language Model for OWL Proofs

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2601.12444v1
• Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2026 14:57:57 GMT
• Title: Large Language Model for OWL Proofs
• Authors: Hui Yang, Jiaoyan Chen, Uli Sattler,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) can perform reasoning tasks such as deduction tasks.<n>We study proof generation in the context of construction, which are widely adopted for representing andreadable reasoning over complex knowledge.
• Score: 9.414596911029243
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) to perform reasoning tasks such as deduction has been widely investigated in recent years. Yet, their capacity to generate proofs-faithful, human-readable explanations of why conclusions follow-remains largely under explored. In this work, we study proof generation in the context of OWL ontologies, which are widely adopted for representing and reasoning over complex knowledge, by developing an automated dataset construction and evaluation framework. Our evaluation encompassing three sequential tasks for complete proving: Extraction, Simplification, and Explanation, as well as an additional task of assessing Logic Completeness of the premise. Through extensive experiments on widely used reasoning LLMs, we achieve important findings including: (1) Some models achieve overall strong results but remain limited on complex cases; (2) Logical complexity, rather than representation format (formal logic language versus natural language), is the dominant factor shaping LLM performance; and (3) Noise and incompleteness in input data substantially diminish LLMs' performance. Together, these results underscore both the promise of LLMs for explanation with rigorous logics and the gap of supporting resilient reasoning under complex or imperfect conditions. Code and data are available at https://github.com/HuiYang1997/LLMOwlR.

Related papers

• mSCoRe: a $M$ultilingual and Scalable Benchmark for $S$kill-based $Co$mmonsense $Re$asoning [74.97363626515236]
  We propose a textbfMultilingual and Scalable Benchmark for textbfSkill-based textbfCommonsense textbfReasoning (textbfmSCoRe)<n>Our benchmark incorporates three key components that are designed to systematically evaluate LLM's reasoning capabilities.<n>Our results reveal the limitations of such reasoning-reinforced models when confronted with nuanced multilingual general and cultural commonsense.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-13T18:59:02Z)
• CLATTER: Comprehensive Entailment Reasoning for Hallucination Detection [60.98964268961243]
  We propose that guiding models to perform a systematic and comprehensive reasoning process allows models to execute much finer-grained and accurate entailment decisions.<n>We define a 3-step reasoning process, consisting of (i) claim decomposition, (ii) sub-claim attribution and entailment classification, and (iii) aggregated classification, showing that such guided reasoning indeed yields improved hallucination detection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-05T17:02:52Z)
• FOL-Pretrain: A complexity annotated corpus of first-order logic [16.061040115094592]
  Transformer-based large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable reasoning capabilities.<n>Despite recent efforts to reverse-engineer LLM behavior, our understanding of how these models internalize and execute complex algorithms remains limited.<n>We introduce a large-scale, fully open, complexity-annotated dataset of first-order logic reasoning traces.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-20T21:38:28Z)
• ZebraLogic: On the Scaling Limits of LLMs for Logical Reasoning [92.76959707441954]
  We introduce ZebraLogic, a comprehensive evaluation framework for assessing LLM reasoning performance.<n>ZebraLogic enables the generation of puzzles with controllable and quantifiable complexity.<n>Our results reveal a significant decline in accuracy as problem complexity grows.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-03T06:44:49Z)
• JustLogic: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Evaluating Deductive Reasoning in Large Language Models [51.99046112135311]
  We introduce JustLogic, a synthetically generated deductive reasoning benchmark for rigorous evaluation of Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>JustLogic is highly complex, capable of generating a diverse range of linguistic patterns, vocabulary, and argument structures.<n>Our experimental results reveal that (i) state-of-the-art (SOTA) reasoning LLMs perform on par or better than the human average but significantly worse than the human ceiling.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-24T15:49:10Z)
• Argumentation Computation with Large Language Models : A Benchmark Study [6.0682923348298194]
  Large language models (LLMs) have made significant advancements in neuro-symbolic computing.<n>We aim to investigate the capability of LLMs in determining the extensions of various abstract argumentation semantics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-21T18:23:06Z)
• Inductive Learning of Logical Theories with LLMs: An Expressivity-Graded Analysis [9.865771016218549]
  This work presents a novel systematic methodology to analyse the capabilities and limitations of Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>The analysis is complexity-graded w.r.t. rule dependency structure, allowing quantification of specific inference challenges on LLM performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-15T16:41:00Z)
• CLR-Fact: Evaluating the Complex Logical Reasoning Capability of Large Language Models over Factual Knowledge [44.59258397967782]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities across various natural language processing tasks. We present a systematic evaluation of state-of-the-art LLMs' complex logical reasoning abilities. We find that LLMs excel at reasoning over general world knowledge but face significant challenges with specialized domain-specific knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-30T05:40:32Z)
• LLMs for Relational Reasoning: How Far are We? [8.840750655261251]
  Large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized many areas by achieving state-of-the-art performance on downstream tasks. Recent efforts have demonstrated that the LLMs are poor at solving sequential decision-making problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-17T08:22:52Z)
• 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)
• Exploring Self-supervised Logic-enhanced Training for Large Language Models [59.227222647741094]
  In this paper, we make the first attempt to investigate the feasibility of incorporating logical knowledge through self-supervised post-training. We devise an auto-regressive objective variant of MERIt and integrate it with two LLM series, i.e., FLAN-T5 and LLaMA, with parameter size ranging from 3 billion to 13 billion. The results on two challenging logical reasoning benchmarks demonstrate the effectiveness of LogicLLM.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T06:13:10Z)

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.