GEAR: A General Evaluation Framework for Abductive Reasoning
On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation
Abstract (arXiv)
Since the advent of large language models (LLMs), research has focused on instruction following and deductive reasoning. A central question remains: can these models discover new knowledge, and how can we evaluate this ability? We address this by studying abductive reasoning-the generation of plausible hypotheses to explain observations-and introduce GEAR (General Evaluation for Abductive Reasoning), a general-purpose, fully automated, transparent, and label-free evaluation paradigm. GEAR scores hypothesis sets by three metrics: consistency (each hypothesis explains the observations), generalizability (consistent hypotheses make meaningful predictions on unseen inputs), and diversity (the set covers distinct predictions and patterns). Built this way, GEAR is scalable (no human gold answers), reliable (deterministic scoring aligned with classical abduction), and open-ended (scores improve only when models produce new plausible hypotheses, unlike static benchmarks that saturate once accuracy is high). Using GEAR, we conduct a fine-grained study of nine LLMs on four abduction benchmarks with 1,500 problems, generating over 50,000 candidate hypotheses and revealing model differences obscured by gold-answer or purely human evaluations. We further propose a momentum-based curriculum that adjusts GEAR-derived training data by learning velocity: it starts with what the model learns quickly and shifts toward harder objectives such as generating diverse hypotheses once the model is confident on foundational objectives. Without gold-label supervision, this strategy improves all GEAR objectives and these gains transfer to established abductive reasoning benchmarks. Taken together, GEAR provides a principled framework that evaluates abduction and supplies label-free, scalable training signals that help LLMs produce more diverse and reliable hypotheses.
Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 12 of its 58 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Sep 2025.
Builds on
12 of 58 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2025Logical Reasoning in Large Language Models: A Survey13 Feb
- 2023Logical Reasoning over Natural Language as Knowledge Representation: A Survey21 Mar
Other references · 10
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,512
- 2024Qwen2.5 Technical Reportcited by 4,942
- 2024Gemma 2: Improving Open Language Models at a Practical Sizecited by 1,998
- 2015Towards AI-Complete Question Answering: A Set of Prerequisite Toy Taskscited by 314
- 2019On the Measure of Intelligencecited by 144
- 2024Nova: An Iterative Planning and Search Approach to Enhance Novelty and Diversity of LLM Generated Ideascited by 57
- 2024Large Language Models and Cognitive Science: A Comprehensive Review of Similarities, Differences, and Challengescited by 49
- 2025Dynamic Loss-Based Sample Reweighting for Improved Large Language Model Pretrainingcited by 16
- 2025InductionBench: LLMs Fail in the Simplest Complexity Classcited by 9
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 6.
6 papers.
- 2026Wiring the 'Why': A Unified Taxonomy and Survey of Abductive Reasoning in LLMscited by 5
- 2026AILS-NTUA at SemEval-2026 Task 12: Graph-Based Retrieval and Reflective Prompting for Abductive Event Reasoningcited by 2
- 2026Explanation Quality Assessment as Ranking with Listwise Rewardscited by 0
- 2026LLMs Can See the Smoke but not the Fire: Evaluating Abductive Reasoning with Elenchoscited by 0
- 2026CEDAR-GRPO: Process-Aware Reinforcement Learning for General Abductive Reasoning in LLMscited by 0
- 2026When the Canonical Completion Is Wrong: Formalizing and Measuring the Jump in Large Language Modelscited by 0
- 2026When the Canonical Completion Is Wrong: Formalizing and Measuring the Jump in Large Language Models22 Aug 2026
- 2026CEDAR-GRPO: Process-Aware Reinforcement Learning for General Abductive Reasoning in LLMs14 Aug 2026
- 2026LLMs Can See the Smoke but not the Fire: Evaluating Abductive Reasoning with Elenchos14 Jul 2026
- 2026Explanation Quality Assessment as Ranking with Listwise Rewards27 Apr 2026
- 2026Wiring the 'Why': A Unified Taxonomy and Survey of Abductive Reasoning in LLMs9 Apr 2026
- 2026AILS-NTUA at SemEval-2026 Task 12: Graph-Based Retrieval and Reflective Prompting for Abductive Event Reasoning4 Mar 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2022AbductionRules: Training Transformers to Explain Unexpected Inputs
- 2026Abductive Reasoning with Probabilistic Commonsense
- 2026Abductive Reasoning with Syllogistic Forms in Large Language Models
- 2026Graph of States: Solving Abductive Tasks with Large Language Models
- 2026Don't Let Me Ask for It: LLMs Show Deficiencies in Active Multi-Turn Information Acquisition for Abductive Inference
- 2023UNcommonsense Reasoning: Abductive Reasoning about Uncommon Situations
- 2025Do Language Models Follow Occam's Razor? An Evaluation of Parsimony in Inductive and Abductive Reasoning
- 2025Abductive Inference in Retrieval-Augmented Language Models: Generating and Validating Missing Premises