Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Can Large Language Models Learn Formal Logic? A Data-Driven Training and Evaluation Framework

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2504.20213 v1 pith:CJQVPW7V submitted 2025-04-28 cs.LG cs.AI

classification cs.LGcs.AI
keywords proofsmodelsproofreasoningabilityassumptionscapabilitiescomplex
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

This paper investigates the logical reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs). For a precisely defined yet tractable formulation, we choose the conceptually simple but technically complex task of constructing proofs in Boolean logic. A trained LLM receives as input a set of assumptions and a goal, and produces as output a proof that formally derives the goal from the assumptions. Incorrect proofs are caught by an automated proof checker. A critical obstacle for training is the scarcity of real-world proofs. We propose an efficient, randomized procedure for synthesizing valid proofs and introduce Template Transformation, a data augmentation technique that enhances the model's ability to handle complex logical expressions. The central evaluation question is whether an LLM has indeed learned to reason. We propose tests to measure the reasoning ability of a black-box LLM. By these measures, experiments demonstrate strong reasoning capabilities for assertions with short proofs, which decline with proof complexity. Notably, template transformation improves accuracy even for smaller models, suggesting its effectiveness across model scales.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Do Large Language Models Excel in Complex Logical Reasoning with Formal Language?

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A broad evaluation across 66 tasks and four trajectory formats shows formal languages help thinking models most, inductive reasoning stays weak everywhere, and rejection-sampled formal data lifts small models.

Pith tools