# Reasoning-as-Logic-Units: Scaling Test-Time Reasoning in Large Language Models Through Logic Unit Alignment

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.07803 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.07803/

## Key facts

- Cited by 12 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 38 of its 43 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 5 Feb 2025.

## Placed in

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

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 38)

- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.11171/) (2022)
- [Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Dataset](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.03874/) (2021)
- [Program Synthesis with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.07732/) (2021)
- [Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.10601/) (2023)
- [Scaling LLM Test-Time Compute Optimally can be More Effective than Scaling Model Parameters](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.03314/) (2024)
- [MetaGPT: Meta Programming for A Multi-Agent Collaborative Framework](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.00352/) (2023)
- [Least-to-Most Prompting Enables Complex Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.10625/) (2022)
- [Is Your Code Generated by ChatGPT Really Correct? Rigorous Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.01210/) (2023)
- [Program of Thoughts Prompting: Disentangling Computation from Reasoning for Numerical Reasoning Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.12588/) (2022)
- [Large Language Models Cannot Self-Correct Reasoning Yet](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.01798/) (2023)
- [Teaching Large Language Models to Self-Debug](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.05128/) (2023)
- [Graph of Thoughts: Solving Elaborate Problems with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.09687/) (2023)
- [CRITIC: Large Language Models Can Self-Correct with Tool-Interactive Critiquing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.11738/) (2023)
- [Automatic Chain of Thought Prompting in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03493/) (2022)
- [GSM-Symbolic: Understanding the Limitations of Mathematical Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.05229/) (2024)
- [CodeT: Code Generation with Generated Tests](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.10397/) (2022)
- [OpenCodeInterpreter: Integrating Code Generation with Execution and Refinement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.14658/) (2024)
- [When Can LLMs Actually Correct Their Own Mistakes? A Critical Survey of Self-Correction of LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.01297/) (2024)
- [LEVER: Learning to Verify Language-to-Code Generation with Execution](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.08468/) (2023)
- [Evaluating the Logical Reasoning Ability of ChatGPT and GPT-4](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.03439/) (2023)
- [SelfCheck: Using LLMs to Zero-Shot Check Their Own Step-by-Step Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.00436/) (2023)
- [Evaluation of OpenAI o1: Opportunities and Challenges of AGI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.18486/) (2024)
- [Deductive Verification of Chain-of-Thought Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.03872/) (2023)
- [Chain-of-Thought Hub: A Continuous Effort to Measure Large Language Models' Reasoning Performance](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.17306/) (2023)
- [Beyond Accuracy: Evaluating the Reasoning Behavior of Large Language Models -- A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.01869/) (2024)
- [Automated Repair of Programs from Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.10583/) (2022)
- [Natural Language Reasoning, A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.14725/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models have Intrinsic Self-Correction Ability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.15673/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 12 of 12)

- [Towards Reasoning Era: A Survey of Long Chain-of-Thought for Reasoning Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.09567/) (2025)
- [A Survey on Test-Time Scaling in Large Language Models: What, How, Where, and How Well?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.24235/) (2025)
- [UI-Venus Technical Report: Building High-performance UI Agents with RFT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.10833/) (2025)
- [Scaling over Scaling: Exploring Test-Time Scaling Plateau in Large Reasoning Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.20522/) (2025)
- [Reasoning Path Divergence: A New Metric and Curation Strategy to Unlock LLM Diverse Thinking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.26122/) (2025)
- [Trust but Verify! A Survey on Verification Design for Test-time Scaling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.16665/) (2025)
- [3D-Layout-R1: Structured Reasoning for Language-Instructed Spatial Editing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.22279/) (2026)
- [Reasoning Can Be Restored by Correcting a Few Decision Tokens](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.16874/) (2026)
- [LLMSR@XLLM25: An Empirical Study of LLM for Structural Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.12328/) (2025)
- [Towards Compositional Generalization in LLMs for Smart Contract Security: A Case Study on Reentrancy Vulnerabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.06914/) (2026)
- [Primal Generation, Dual Judgment: Self-Training from Test-Time Scaling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.11299/) (2026)
- [Refining Over Resampling: Test-Time Self-Correction for LLM Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.05643/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting has shown promise in enhancing the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) by generating natural language (NL) rationales that lead to the final answer. However, it struggles with numerical computation, which has somehow led to the development of program-aided techniques. Despite their potential, a persistent challenge remains: inconsistencies between LLM-reported reasoning steps and the logic in generated programs, which we term ``reasoning hallucinations." This stems from the inherent ambiguities of NL and the statistical nature of LLMs, which often lack rigorous logical coherence. To address this challenge, we propose a novel test-time scaling framework, Reasoning-as-Logic-Units (RaLU), which constructs a more reliable reasoning path by aligning logical units between the generated program and their corresponding NL descriptions. By decomposing the initially generated program into discrete units using static analysis, RaLU engages in an iterative dialogue with the LLM to judge, refine, and explain each unit. A rewind-and-correct mechanism ensures alignment between code statements and task requirements in each unit, ultimately forming a cohesive reasoning path under the program's logic, from which the model reaches a final solution. Our experiments demonstrate that RaLU significantly outperforms existing baselines in mathematical reasoning (GSM8K, MATH) and algorithmic reasoning (HumanEval+, MBPP+), underscoring its potential to advance LLM reasoning and programming by offering enhanced accuracy and interpretability.