Papers › Assessing and Enhancing the Robustness of Large Language Models with Task Structure...

Assessing and Enhancing the Robustness of Large Language Models with Task Structure Variations for Logical Reasoning

13 Oct 2023arXiv:2310.09430archive 2025-07-28

Qiming Bao, Gael Gendron, Alex Yuxuan Peng, Wanjun Zhong, Neset Tan, Yang Chen, Michael Witbrock, Jiamou Liu

Large language models (LLMs), such as LLaMA, Alpaca, Vicuna, GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, have advanced the performance of AI systems on various natural language processing tasks to human-like levels. However, their generalisation and robustness when performing logical reasoning has not been sufficiently assessed. To comprehensively evaluate this ability, we develop three new logical reasoning datasets named "ReClor-plus", "LogiQA-plus" and "LogiQAv2-plus" that extend standard logical reasoning datasets to evaluate the robustness of the LLM's reasoning. For each, we create three subsets: the first with randomly shuffled options, the second with the correct choices replaced by "none of the other options is correct", and the third with a combination of shuffling and substitution. Experiments on these datasets show that these simple augmentations greatly hinder the models' performance. Despite their high performance on the original publicly available datasets, we find that all models perform poorly on these newly constructed datasets. We also demonstrate that introducing task variations into the training set can markedly improve the model's performance on both the original and our developed datasets. Finally, we show that applying logic-driven data augmentation for fine-tuning and prompting can enhance generalisation in both discriminative and generative models, offering a path to improving their robustness for tasks involving logical reasoning. Source code and data are made publicly available at https://github.com/Strong-AI-Lab/Logical-and-abstract-reasoning.

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

8 samples harvested; 6 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 2 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-25; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 0 of the 8 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from strong-ai-lab/logical-and-abstract-reasoning. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Tasks

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections