# ReasoningWeekly: A General Knowledge and Verbal Reasoning Challenge for Large Language Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.01584 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.01584/

## Key facts

- Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 8 of its 30 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 3 Feb 2025.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/lr/reasoning-benchmarks-and-evaluation/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 8 of 8)

- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.12948/) (2025)
- [s1: Simple test-time scaling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.19393/) (2025)
- [GSM-Symbolic: Understanding the Limitations of Mathematical Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.05229/) (2024)
- [Thoughts Are All Over the Place: On the Underthinking of o1-Like LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.18585/) (2025)
- [On the Measure of Intelligence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.01547/) (2019)
- [MACM: Utilizing a Multi-Agent System for Condition Mining in Solving Complex Mathematical Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.04735/) (2024)
- [Achieving >97% on GSM8K: Deeply Understanding the Problems Makes LLMs Better Solvers for Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.14963/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 8 of 8)

- [Towards Reasoning Era: A Survey of Long Chain-of-Thought for Reasoning Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.09567/) (2025)
- [Enigmata: Scaling Logical Reasoning in Large Language Models with Synthetic Verifiable Puzzles](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.19914/) (2025)
- [The relationship between reasoning and performance in large language models--o3 (mini) thinks harder, not longer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.15631/) (2025)
- [Harnessing the Reasoning Economy: A Survey of Efficient Reasoning for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.24377/) (2025)
- [NP-Engine: Empowering Optimization Reasoning in Large Language Models with Verifiable Synthetic NP Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.16476/) (2025)
- [Lexical Hints of Accuracy in LLM Reasoning Chains](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.15842/) (2025)
- [Control-R: Towards controllable test-time scaling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.00189/) (2025)
- [FlagEval Findings Report: A Preliminary Evaluation of Large Reasoning Models on Automatically Verifiable Textual and Visual Questions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.17177/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Existing benchmarks for frontier models often test specialized, "PhD-level" knowledge that is difficult for non-experts to grasp. In contrast, we present a benchmark with 613 problems based on the NPR Sunday Puzzle Challenge that requires only general knowledge. Our benchmark is challenging for both humans and models; however correct solutions are easy to verify, and models' mistakes are easy to spot. As LLMs are more widely deployed in society, we believe it is useful to develop benchmarks for frontier models that humans can understand without the need for deep domain expertise. Our work reveals capability gaps that are not evident in existing benchmarks: OpenAI o1 significantly outperforms other reasoning models on our benchmark, despite being on par with other models when tested on benchmarks that test specialized knowledge. Furthermore, our analysis of reasoning outputs uncovers new kinds of failures. DeepSeek R1, for instance, often concedes with "I give up" before providing an answer that it knows is wrong. R1 can also be remarkably "uncertain" in its output and in rare cases, it does not "finish thinking," which suggests the need for techniques to ``wrap up'' before the context window limit is reached. We also quantify the effectiveness of reasoning longer to identify the point beyond which more reasoning is unlikely to improve accuracy on our benchmark.