mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

HardcoreLogic: Challenging Large Reasoning Models with Long-tail Logic Puzzle Games

arXiv 2510.12563 ↗First posted 14 Oct 2025cs.AIcited by 7

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation

Abstract (arXiv)

Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) have demonstrated impressive performance on complex tasks, including logical puzzle games that require deriving solutions satisfying all constraints. However, whether they can flexibly apply appropriate rules to varying conditions, particularly when faced with non-canonical game variants, remains an open question. Existing corpora focus on popular puzzles like 9x9 Sudoku, risking overfitting to canonical formats and memorization of solution patterns, which can mask deficiencies in understanding novel rules or adapting strategies to new variants. To address this, we introduce HardcoreLogic, a challenging benchmark of over 5,000 puzzles across 10 games, designed to test the robustness of LRMs on the "long-tail" of logical games. HardcoreLogic systematically transforms canonical puzzles through three dimensions: Increased Complexity (IC), Uncommon Elements (UE), and Unsolvable Puzzles (UP), reducing reliance on shortcut memorization. Evaluations on a diverse set of LRMs reveal significant performance drops, even for models achieving top scores on existing benchmarks, indicating heavy reliance on memorized stereotypes. While increased complexity is the dominant source of difficulty, models also struggle with subtle rule variations that do not necessarily increase puzzle difficulty. Our systematic error analysis on solvable and unsolvable puzzles further highlights gaps in genuine reasoning. Overall, HardcoreLogic exposes the limitations of current LRMs and establishes a benchmark for advancing high-level logical reasoning.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 11 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Oct 2025.

Builds on

11 of 33 references.

Closest ancestors · 7

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025GLM-4.5: Agentic, Reasoning, and Coding (ARC) Foundation Models8 Aug
  2. 2025Qwen3 Technical Report14 May
  3. 2025Generative Evaluation of Complex Reasoning in Large Language Models3 Apr
  4. 2025JustLogic: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Evaluating Deductive Reasoning in Large Language Models24 Jan
  5. 2024DeepSeek-V3 Technical Report27 Dec
  6. 2023Towards LogiGLUE: A Brief Survey and A Benchmark for Analyzing Logical Reasoning Capabilities of Language Models2 Oct
  7. 2023Logical Reasoning over Natural Language as Knowledge Representation: A Survey21 Mar

Other references · 4

  1. 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,330
  2. 2025gpt-oss-120b & gpt-oss-20b Model Cardcited by 1,386
  3. 2025MiniMax-M1: Scaling Test-Time Compute Efficiently with Lightning Attentioncited by 263
  4. 2025ARC-AGI-2: A New Challenge for Frontier AI Reasoning Systemscited by 190

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 7.

7 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Sudoku-Bench: Evaluating creative reasoning with Sudoku variants
  2. 2024Puzzle Solving using Reasoning of Large Language Models: A Survey
  3. 2025PuzzlePlex: Benchmarking Foundation Models on Reasoning and Planning with Puzzles
  4. 2025PuzzleJAX: A Benchmark for Reasoning and Learning
  5. 2026ClassicLogic: A Knowledge-Driven Benchmark of Classic Puzzle Games for Evaluating Compositional Generalization
  6. 2025PuzzleWorld: A Benchmark for Multimodal, Open-Ended Reasoning in Puzzlehunts
  7. 2025TTT-Bench: A Benchmark for Evaluating Reasoning Ability with Simple and Novel Tic-Tac-Toe-style Games
  8. 2025ZebraLogic: On the Scaling Limits of LLMs for Logical Reasoning