Reasoning in Transformers -- Mitigating Spurious Correlations and Reasoning Shortcuts
On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation
Abstract (arXiv)
Transformer language models are neural networks used for a wide variety of tasks concerning natural language, including some that also require logical reasoning. However, a transformer model may easily learn spurious patterns in the data, short-circuiting actual reasoning. In this paper we investigate to what extent transformers can be trained to a) approximate reasoning in propositional logic while b) avoiding known reasoning shortcuts via spurious correlations in the training data. To do so, we use a dataset with known spurious correlation between truth and e.g. the number of rules in the problem. We augment the data with proofs, and train two models: a generative transformer, WP-BART, trained on problems and their whole proofs, and a neuro-symbolic model, SIP-BART, trained on individual proof steps and combining the generative transformer model BART with a symbolic proof checker. We find that SIP-BART succeeds in avoiding reasoning shortcuts, while WP-BART does not. For SIP-BART, we then identify a few remaining reasoning errors, not previously described in the literature, arising from using a pre-trained language model. These are qualitatively analysed to create a taxonomy of four different types of additional pitfalls.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 6 of its 24 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Mar 2024.
Builds on
6 of 24 references.
References · 6
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2020Generative Language Modeling for Automated Theorem Provingcited by 388
- 2022PlanBench: An Extensible Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Models on Planning and Reasoning about Changecited by 382
- 2017Massive Exploration of Neural Machine Translation Architecturescited by 55
- 2021Neuro-Symbolic AI: An Emerging Class of AI Workloads and their Characterizationcited by 22
- 2020Mathematical Reasoning via Self-supervised Skip-tree Trainingcited by 3
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 2; 2026: 2.
5 papers.
- 2026Large Language Model Reasoning Failurescited by 21
- 2025FINEREASON: Evaluating and Improving LLMs' Deliberate Reasoning through Reflective Puzzle Solvingcited by 11
- 2026IslamicLegalBench: Evaluating LLMs Knowledge and Reasoning of Islamic Law Across 1,200 Years of Islamic Pluralist Legal Traditionscited by 5
- 2025Integrating Expert Knowledge into Logical Programs via LLMscited by 3
- 2024Long-Term Prediction Accuracy Improvement of Data-Driven Medium-Range Global Weather Forecastcited by 0
- 2026Large Language Model Reasoning Failures5 Feb 2026
- 2026IslamicLegalBench: Evaluating LLMs Knowledge and Reasoning of Islamic Law Across 1,200 Years of Islamic Pluralist Legal Traditions2 Feb 2026
- 2025FINEREASON: Evaluating and Improving LLMs' Deliberate Reasoning through Reflective Puzzle Solving27 Feb 2025
- 2025Integrating Expert Knowledge into Logical Programs via LLMs17 Feb 2025
- 2024Long-Term Prediction Accuracy Improvement of Data-Driven Medium-Range Global Weather Forecast26 Jun 2024
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2024Grokked Transformers are Implicit Reasoners: A Mechanistic Journey to the Edge of Generalization
- 2026To See the Unseen: on the Generalization Ability of Transformers in Symbolic Reasoning
- 2023Assessing Logical Reasoning Capabilities of Encoder-Only Transformer Models
- 2022Can Transformers Reason in Fragments of Natural Language?
- 2023Transformers in the Service of Description Logic-based Contexts
- 2023Examining the Emergence of Deductive Reasoning in Generative Language Models
- 2026Feature Resemblance: Towards a Theoretical Understanding of Analogical Reasoning in Transformers
- 2025Hierarchical Reasoning Models: Perspectives and Misconceptions