mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

BIS Reasoning 1.0: The First Large-Scale Japanese Benchmark for Belief-Inconsistent Syllogistic Reasoning

arXiv 2506.06955 ↗First posted 8 Jun 2025cs.CL cs.AIcited by 2

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation

Abstract (arXiv)

We present BIS Reasoning 1.0, the first large-scale Japanese dataset of syllogistic reasoning problems explicitly designed to evaluate belief-inconsistent reasoning in large language models (LLMs). Unlike prior resources such as NeuBAROCO and JFLD, which emphasize general or belief-aligned logic, BIS Reasoning 1.0 systematically introduces logically valid yet belief-inconsistent syllogisms to expose belief bias, the tendency to accept believable conclusions irrespective of validity. We benchmark a representative suite of cutting-edge models, including OpenAI GPT-5 variants, GPT-4o, Qwen, and prominent Japanese LLMs, under a uniform, zero-shot protocol. Reasoning-centric models achieve near-perfect accuracy on BIS Reasoning 1.0 (e.g., Qwen3-32B ≈99% and GPT-5-mini up to ≈99.7%), while GPT-4o attains around 80%. Earlier Japanese-specialized models underperform, often well below 60%, whereas the latest llm-jp-3.1-13b-instruct4 markedly improves to the mid-80% range. These results indicate that robustness to belief-inconsistent inputs is driven more by explicit reasoning optimization than by language specialization or scale alone. Our analysis further shows that even top-tier systems falter when logical validity conflicts with intuitive or factual beliefs, and that performance is sensitive to prompt design and inference-time reasoning effort. We discuss implications for safety-critical domains, including law, healthcare, and scientific literature, where strict logical fidelity must override intuitive belief to ensure reliability.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 4 of its 19 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Jun 2025.

Builds on

4 of 19 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2022Language models show human-like content effects on reasoning tasks14 Jul

Other references · 3

  1. 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,720
  2. 2024LLM-jp: A Cross-organizational Project for the Research and Development of Fully Open Japanese LLMscited by 33
  3. 2023A negation detection assessment of GPTs: analysis with the xNot360 datasetcited by 10

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.

2 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2024Exploring Reasoning Biases in Large Language Models Through Syllogism: Insights from the NeuBAROCO Dataset
  2. 2025Cross-Lingual Consistency: A Novel Inference Framework for Advancing Reasoning in Large Language Models
  3. 2026Cost of Reasoning in non-English Languages: A Case Study on Japanese
  4. 2023Chain-of-Thought Hub: A Continuous Effort to Measure Large Language Models' Reasoning Performance
  5. 2025Logical Reasoning in Large Language Models: A Survey
  6. 2025Efficient Inference for Large Reasoning Models: A Survey
  7. 2025A Closer Look at Bias and Chain-of-Thought Faithfulness of Large (Vision) Language Models
  8. 2025EffiReason-Bench: A Unified Benchmark for Evaluating and Advancing Efficient Reasoning in Large Language Models