From 0-Order Selection to 2-Order Judgment: Combinatorial Hardening Exposes Compositional Failures in Frontier LLMs

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.07268v1
• Date: Fri, 08 May 2026 05:33:58 GMT
• Title: From 0-Order Selection to 2-Order Judgment: Combinatorial Hardening Exposes Compositional Failures in Frontier LLMs
• Abstract summary: Multiple-choice reasoning benchmarks face dual challenges: rapid saturation from advancing models and data contamination.<n>We present LogiHard, a formal framework that deterministically transforms 0-order selection into 2-order logical judgment.
• Score: 4.478347601177043
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Multiple-choice reasoning benchmarks face dual challenges: rapid saturation from advancing models and data contamination that undermines static evaluations. Ad-hoc hardening methods (paraphrasing, perturbation) attempt to increase difficulty but sacrifice logical validity for surface complexity, falling short to challenge advanced reasoning models. We present LogiHard, a formal framework that deterministically transforms 0-order selection into 2-order logical judgment, which significantly increases the thinking overhead and reasoning steps. The framework integrates Item Response Theory (IRT) for computerized adaptive testing (CAT), enabling precise difficulty control with fewer questions than static benchmarks. We instantiate LogiHard-2k, a logical reasoning dataset constructed by cognitively ranking high-stakes examination questions via 9-dimensional analysis of model thinking traces, followed by combinatorial transformation of high-difficulty items. Evaluation across twelve state-of-the-art models reveals an accuracy degradation ranging from 31% to 56% on combinatorially hardened questions. LLMs suffer from the multi-select failure and early exit bias, which are not shared by human testees. Zero-shot transfer to MMLU demonstrates 47% accuracy degradation (89.84% to 42.86%), confirming applicability across domains with provable validity preservation. The consistent aggregate degeneration is domain-agnostic and stems not from knowledge deficits but from a combinatorial reasoning gap, reflecting a training-induced completeness-verification deficit.

Related papers

• What Does MMLU Actually Measure? A Psychometric Audit of Difficulty Structure in Aggregate Benchmark Scores [0.0]
  We calibrate item difficulty for 1,000 open-weights language models over 14,042 MMLU test items.<n>We show that evaluating both abilities via a single test is inherently flawed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-08T19:11:10Z)
• A Temporal Reasoning Benchmarking Framework for LRMs via Difficulty-controlled and Dynamic Test Generation [11.290047096794082]
  We introduce TRACE, a testing framework that models temporal reasoning as constraint satisfaction problems via Allen's Interval Algebra.<n>TRACE provides a robust, automated platform for benchmarking the true temporal reasoning capabilities of LRMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-06T08:14:53Z)
• GIM: Evaluating models via tasks that integrate multiple cognitive domains [42.01371688303606]
  Grounded Integration Measure is a benchmark of 820 original problems.<n>Each problem is an original expert-authored composition.<n>A balanced public-private split provides built-in contamination diagnostic.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-18T17:09:50Z)
• Empirical Evidence of Complexity-Induced Limits in Large Language Models on Finite Discrete State-Space Problems with Explicit Validity Constraints [0.6524460254566904]
  We systematically evaluate the robustness of reasoning in Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) under progressively increasing problem complexity.<n>We construct a suite of nine classical reasoning tasks: Boolean Satisfiability, Cryptarithmetic, Graph Coloring, River Crossing, Tower of Hanoi, Water Jug, Checker Jumping, Sudoku, and Rubik's Cube.<n>We observe substantial accuracy declines, often exceeding 50%, accompanied by inconsistent reasoning traces, constraint violations, loss of state tracking, and confidently incorrect outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-15T00:35:22Z)
• Adaptive Multi-Expert Reasoning via Difficulty-Aware Routing and Uncertainty-Guided Aggregation [0.2864713389096699]
  This paper describes Adaptive Multi-Expert Reasoning (AMR), a framework that focuses on problem complexity by reasoning with dynamically adapted strategies.<n>An agile routing system that focuses on problem text predicts problems' difficulty and uncertainty and guides a reconfigurable sampling mechanism to manage the breadth of generation.<n>When evaluated on the GSM8K dataset, AMR achieved 75.28% accuracy while only using the original training data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-11T19:44:57Z)
• Beyond Final Answers: CRYSTAL Benchmark for Transparent Multimodal Reasoning Evaluation [3.23600523782706]
  We introduce CRYSTAL (Clear Reasoning via Yielded Steps, Traceability, and Logic), a diagnostic benchmark with 6,372 instances that evaluates multimodal reasoning.<n>We propose two complementary metrics: Match F1, which scores step-level precision and recall via semantic similarity matching, and Ordered Match F1, which penalizes disordered reasoning chains.<n>CPR-Curriculum achieves a 32% improvement in Match F1 via GRPO where additive reward strategies fail, improving reasoning without manual step annotation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-13T15:48:15Z)
• Test-Time Scaling with Diffusion Language Models via Reward-Guided Stitching [66.39914384073145]
  We propose a self-consistency framework that turns cheap diffusion-sampled reasoning into a reusable pool of step-level candidates.<n>We find that step-level recombination is most beneficial on harder problems.<n>Our training-free framework improves average accuracy by up to 2 across six math and coding tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-26T11:08:39Z)
• From Abstract to Contextual: What LLMs Still Cannot Do in Mathematics [79.81905350372067]
  We study gap through contextual mathematical reasoning.<n>We introduce ContextMATH, a benchmark that repurposes AIME and MATH-500 problems into two contextual settings.<n>Open-source models decline by 13 and 34 points on SG and CS, while proprietary models drop by 13 and 20.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-30T14:56:04Z)
• Eigen-1: Adaptive Multi-Agent Refinement with Monitor-Based RAG for Scientific Reasoning [53.45095336430027]
  We develop a unified framework that combines implicit retrieval and structured collaboration.<n>On Humanity's Last Exam (HLE) Bio/Chem Gold, our framework achieves 48.3% accuracy.<n>Results on SuperGPQA and TRQA confirm robustness across domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-25T14:05:55Z)
• Climbing the Ladder of Reasoning: What LLMs Can-and Still Can't-Solve after SFT? [59.418994222096885]
  We conduct a detailed analysis of model performance on the AIME24 dataset.<n>We categorize questions into four tiers (Easy, Medium, Hard, and Extremely Hard)<n>We find that progression from Easy to Medium tier requires adopting an R1 reasoning style with minimal SFT-1K instances.<n>Exh-level questions present a fundamentally different challenge; they require unconventional problem-solving skills.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-16T03:39:38Z)
• FINEREASON: Evaluating and Improving LLMs' Deliberate Reasoning through Reflective Puzzle Solving [90.88021670297664]
  FINEREASON is a logic-puzzle benchmark for evaluation of large language models' reasoning capabilities.<n>We introduce two tasks: state checking, and state transition, for a comprehensive evaluation of how models assess the current situation and plan the next move.<n>We show that models trained on our state checking and transition data demonstrate gains in math reasoning by up to 5.1% on GSM8K.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-27T16:23:25Z)
• 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)

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.