mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Probing Physical Reasoning with Counter-Commonsense Context

arXiv 2306.02258 ↗First posted 4 Jun 2023cs.CLcited by 4

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation

Abstract (arXiv)

In this study, we create a CConS (Counter-commonsense Contextual Size comparison) dataset to investigate how physical commonsense affects the contextualized size comparison task; the proposed dataset consists of both contexts that fit physical commonsense and those that do not. This dataset tests the ability of language models to predict the size relationship between objects under various contexts generated from our curated noun list and templates. We measure the ability of several masked language models and generative models. The results show that while large language models can use prepositions such as ``in'' and ``into'' in the provided context to infer size relationships, they fail to use verbs and thus make incorrect judgments led by their prior physical commonsense.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 18 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Jun 2023.

Builds on

18 of 28 references.

References · 18

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
  2. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  3. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
  4. 2019PIQA: Reasoning about Physical Commonsense in Natural Languagecited by 2,818
  5. 2019ALBERT: A Lite BERT for Self-supervised Learning of Language Representationscited by 2,772
  6. 2018Deep contextualized word representationscited by 2,285
  7. 2021Multitask Prompted Training Enables Zero-Shot Task Generalizationcited by 1,462
  8. 2019oLMpics -- On what Language Model Pre-training Capturescited by 161
  9. 2020Do Language Embeddings Capture Scales?cited by 63
  10. 2019Do Neural Language Representations Learn Physical Commonsense?cited by 62
  11. 2021PROST: Physical Reasoning of Objects through Space and Timecited by 48
  12. 2021PIGLeT: Language Grounding Through Neuro-Symbolic Interaction in a 3D Worldcited by 47
6 more
  1. 2022Things not Written in Text: Exploring Spatial Commonsense from Visual Signalscited by 41
  2. 2021Dimensions of Commonsense Knowledgecited by 29
  3. 2017Verb Physics: Relative Physical Knowledge of Actions and Objectscited by 26
  4. 2019How Large Are Lions? Inducing Distributions over Quantitative Attributescited by 26
  5. 2022PACS: A Dataset for Physical Audiovisual CommonSense Reasoningcited by 17
  6. 2022Penguins Don't Fly: Reasoning about Generics through Instantiations and Exceptionscited by 17

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 2; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.

4 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2023NEWTON: Are Large Language Models Capable of Physical Reasoning?
  2. 2024On the Tip of the Tongue: Analyzing Conceptual Representation in Large Language Models with Reverse-Dictionary Probe
  3. 2026Would You Walk to the Car Wash? Revealing the Salience Bias of Large Language Models in Commonsense Reasoning
  4. 2023POSQA: Probe the World Models of LLMs with Size Comparisons
  5. 2026Abductive Reasoning with Probabilistic Commonsense
  6. 2022rmC small IS2: A Simplified Commonsense Inference Evaluation for Story Prose
  7. 2026Physical Commonsense Reasoning for Lower-Resourced Languages and Dialects: a Study on Basque
  8. 2023Large Language Models are In-Context Semantic Reasoners rather than Symbolic Reasoners