mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

AQA-Bench: An Interactive Benchmark for Evaluating LLMs' Sequential Reasoning Ability

arXiv 2402.09404 ↗First posted 14 Feb 2024cs.CL cs.AI cs.LGcited by 8

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation

Abstract (arXiv)

This paper introduces AQA-Bench, a novel benchmark to assess the sequential reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) in algorithmic contexts, such as depth-first search (DFS). The key feature of our evaluation benchmark lies in its interactive evaluation protocol - for example, in DFS, the availability of each node's connected edge is contingent upon the model's traversal to that node, thereby necessitating the LLM's ability to effectively remember visited nodes and strategize subsequent moves considering the possible environmental feedback in the future steps. We comprehensively build AQA-Bench with three different algorithms, namely binary search, depth-first search, and breadth-first search, and to evaluate the sequential reasoning ability of 14 different LLMs. Our investigations reveal several interesting findings: (1) Closed-source models like GPT-4 and Gemini generally show much stronger sequential reasoning ability, significantly outperforming open-source LLMs. (2) Naively providing in-context examples may inadvertently hurt few-shot performance in an interactive environment due to over-fitting to examples. (3) Instead of using optimal steps from another test case as the in-context example, a very limited number of predecessor steps in the current test case following the optimal policy can substantially boost small models' performance. (4) The performance gap between weak models and strong models is greatly due to the incapability of weak models to start well. (5) The scaling correlation between performance and model size is not always significant, sometimes even showcasing an inverse trend. We hope our study can catalyze future work on advancing the understanding and enhancement of LLMs' capabilities in sequential reasoning. The code is available at https://github.com/UCSC-VLAA/AQA-Bench.

Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 33 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Feb 2024.

Builds on

33 of 38 references.

Closest ancestors · 3

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024DeepSeek LLM: Scaling Open-Source Language Models with Longtermism5 Jan
  2. 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models27 Feb
  3. 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models6 Oct

Other references · 30

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
  3. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,302
  4. 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,743
  5. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
  6. 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
  7. 2022Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Modelscited by 5,601
  8. 2021Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Datasetcited by 5,203
  9. 2022Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasonerscited by 4,323
  10. 2021Program Synthesis with Large Language Modelscited by 3,509
  11. 2023Generative Agents: Interactive Simulacra of Human Behaviorcited by 3,500
  12. 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,193
18 more
  1. 2023Mistral 7Bcited by 3,065
  2. 2023WebArena: A Realistic Web Environment for Building Autonomous Agentscited by 1,908
  3. 2024Mixtral of Expertscited by 1,785
  4. 2022Challenging BIG-Bench Tasks and Whether Chain-of-Thought Can Solve Themcited by 1,767
  5. 2023MetaGPT: Meta Programming for A Multi-Agent Collaborative Frameworkcited by 1,761
  6. 2022Least-to-Most Prompting Enables Complex Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 1,397
  7. 2023AgentBench: Evaluating LLMs as Agentscited by 1,211
  8. 2023Mind2Web: Towards a Generalist Agent for the Webcited by 1,210
  9. 2021Measuring Coding Challenge Competence With APPScited by 879
  10. 2024DeepSeekMoE: Towards Ultimate Expert Specialization in Mixture-of-Experts Language Modelscited by 834
  11. 2023Large Language Models Can Be Easily Distracted by Irrelevant Contextcited by 820
  12. 2017Program Induction by Rationale Generation : Learning to Solve and Explain Algebraic Word Problemscited by 642
  13. 2023Are Emergent Abilities of Large Language Models a Mirage?cited by 515
  14. 2022MineDojo: Building Open-Ended Embodied Agents with Internet-Scale Knowledgecited by 469
  15. 2022Complexity-Based Prompting for Multi-Step Reasoningcited by 387
  16. 2023Do the Rewards Justify the Means? Measuring Trade-Offs Between Rewards and Ethical Behavior in the MACHIAVELLI Benchmarkcited by 174
  17. 2023TaskBench: Benchmarking Large Language Models for Task Automationcited by 138
  18. 2023MindAgent: Emergent Gaming Interactioncited by 87

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 4; 2025: 2; 2026: 2.

8 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025seqBench: A Tunable Benchmark to Quantify Sequential Reasoning Limits of LLMs
  2. 2024CLR-Bench: Evaluating Large Language Models in College-level Reasoning
  3. 2023NPHardEval: Dynamic Benchmark on Reasoning Ability of Large Language Models via Complexity Classes
  4. 2024Are Your LLMs Capable of Stable Reasoning?
  5. 2025Chain-in-Tree: Back to Sequential Reasoning in LLM Tree Search
  6. 2026Beyond Output Correctness: Benchmarking and Evaluating Large Language Model Reasoning in Coding Tasks
  7. 2026A State-Transition Framework for Efficient LLM Reasoning
  8. 2025OneEval: Benchmarking LLM Knowledge-intensive Reasoning over Diverse Knowledge Bases