ProcBench: Benchmark for Multi-Step Reasoning and Following Procedure
On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation
Abstract (arXiv)
Reasoning is central to a wide range of intellectual activities, and while the capabilities of large language models (LLMs) continue to advance, their performance in reasoning tasks remains limited. The processes and mechanisms underlying reasoning are not yet fully understood, but key elements include path exploration, selection of relevant knowledge, and multi-step inference. Problems are solved through the synthesis of these components. In this paper, we propose a benchmark that focuses on a specific aspect of reasoning ability: the direct evaluation of multi-step inference. To this end, we design a special reasoning task where multi-step inference is specifically focused by largely eliminating path exploration and implicit knowledge utilization. Our dataset comprises pairs of explicit instructions and corresponding questions, where the procedures necessary for solving the questions are entirely detailed within the instructions. This setup allows models to solve problems solely by following the provided directives. By constructing problems that require varying numbers of steps to solve and evaluating responses at each step, we enable a thorough assessment of state-of-the-art LLMs' ability to follow instructions. To ensure the robustness of our evaluation, we include multiple distinct tasks. Furthermore, by comparing accuracy across tasks, utilizing step-aware metrics, and applying separately defined measures of complexity, we conduct experiments that offer insights into the capabilities and limitations of LLMs in reasoning tasks. Our findings have significant implications for the development of LLMs and highlight areas for future research in advancing their reasoning abilities. Our dataset is available at urlhttps://huggingface.co/datasets/ifujisawa/procbench and code at urlhttps://github.com/ifujisawa/proc-bench.
Key facts. Cited by 12 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 4 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Oct 2024.
Builds on
4 of 39 references.
References · 4
- 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,302
- 2024LiveCodeBench: Holistic and Contamination Free Evaluation of Large Language Models for Codecited by 1,906
- 2023AgentBench: Evaluating LLMs as Agentscited by 1,211
- 2023MetaMath: Bootstrap Your Own Mathematical Questions for Large Language Modelscited by 724
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 8; 2026: 4.
12 papers.
- 2025AdaCoT: Pareto-Optimal Adaptive Chain-of-Thought Triggering via Reinforcement Learningcited by 86
- 2025Confidence in Large Language Model Evaluation: A Bayesian Approach to Limited-Sample Challengescited by 7
- 2025LookAlike: Consistent Distractor Generation in Math MCQscited by 7
- 2025L0-Reasoning Bench: Evaluating Procedural Correctness in Language Models via Simple Program Executioncited by 5
- 2026ProcCtrlBench: Evaluating Process-Level Defects and Control Preservation in LLM Coding Agentscited by 5
- 2026ConceptMoE: Adaptive Token-to-Concept Compression for Implicit Compute Allocationcited by 2
- 2025MateInfoUB: A Real-World Benchmark for Testing LLMs in Competitive, Multilingual, and Multimodal Educational Taskscited by 1
- 2025PADME: Procedure Aware DynaMic Executioncited by 0
- 2025Evaluating LLMs' Reasoning Over Ordered Procedural Stepscited by 0
- 2025LLM Swiss Round: Aggregating Multi-Benchmark Performance via Competitive Swiss-System Dynamicscited by 0
- 2026Continual LLM Upcycling: A Predictor-Gated Bank-Wise Sparsity Training Recipe for Dense-to-Sparse LLMscited by 0
- 2026Constructing Evaluation Datasets for Procedural Reasoning: Balancing Naturalness, Grounding, and Multi-Hop Coveragecited by 0
- 2026Constructing Evaluation Datasets for Procedural Reasoning: Balancing Naturalness, Grounding, and Multi-Hop Coverage11 Jun 2026
- 2026Continual LLM Upcycling: A Predictor-Gated Bank-Wise Sparsity Training Recipe for Dense-to-Sparse LLMs9 Jun 2026
- 2026ProcCtrlBench: Evaluating Process-Level Defects and Control Preservation in LLM Coding Agents18 May 2026
- 2026ConceptMoE: Adaptive Token-to-Concept Compression for Implicit Compute Allocation29 Jan 2026
- 2025LLM Swiss Round: Aggregating Multi-Benchmark Performance via Competitive Swiss-System Dynamics24 Dec 2025
- 2025Evaluating LLMs' Reasoning Over Ordered Procedural Steps25 Oct 2025
- 2025PADME: Procedure Aware DynaMic Execution13 Oct 2025
- 2025MateInfoUB: A Real-World Benchmark for Testing LLMs in Competitive, Multilingual, and Multimodal Educational Tasks3 Jul 2025
- 2025AdaCoT: Pareto-Optimal Adaptive Chain-of-Thought Triggering via Reinforcement Learning17 May 2025
- 2025LookAlike: Consistent Distractor Generation in Math MCQs3 May 2025
- 2025Confidence in Large Language Model Evaluation: A Bayesian Approach to Limited-Sample Challenges30 Apr 2025
- 2025L0-Reasoning Bench: Evaluating Procedural Correctness in Language Models via Simple Program Execution28 Mar 2025
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025TurnBench-MS: A Benchmark for Evaluating Multi-Turn, Multi-Step Reasoning in Large Language Models
- 2026Opening the Black Box: A Survey on the Mechanisms of Multi-Step Reasoning in Large Language Models
- 2026EvalQReason: A Framework for Step-Level Reasoning Evaluation in Large Language Models
- 2024LogicBench: Towards Systematic Evaluation of Logical Reasoning Ability of Large Language Models
- 2023Chain-of-Thought Hub: A Continuous Effort to Measure Large Language Models' Reasoning Performance
- 2024Multi-LogiEval: Towards Evaluating Multi-Step Logical Reasoning Ability of Large Language Models
- 2025Evaluating Step-by-step Reasoning Traces: A Survey
- 2023ART: Automatic multi-step reasoning and tool-use for large language models