# Causal Strengths and Leaky Beliefs: Interpreting LLM Reasoning via Noisy-OR Causal Bayes Nets

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.11909 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.11909/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 0 of its 3 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 10 Dec 2025.

## Placed in

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

## Abstract (arXiv)

The nature of intelligence in both humans and machines is a longstanding question. While there is no universally accepted definition, the ability to reason causally is often regarded as a pivotal aspect of intelligence (Lake et al., 2017). Evaluating causal reasoning in LLMs and humans on the same tasks provides hence a more comprehensive understanding of their respective strengths and weaknesses. Our study asks: (Q1) Are LLMs aligned with humans given the same reasoning tasks? (Q2) Do LLMs and humans reason consistently at the task level? (Q3) Do they have distinct reasoning signatures? We answer these by evaluating 20+ LLMs on eleven semantically meaningful causal tasks formalized by a collider graph (C1!→!E!leftarrow!C2 ) under Direct (one-shot number as response = probability judgment of query node being one and Chain of Thought (CoT; think first, then provide answer). Judgments are modeled with a leaky noisy-OR causal Bayes net (CBN) whose parameters θ=(b,m1,m2,p(C)) ∈ [0,1] include a shared prior p(C); we select the winning model via AIC between a 3-parameter symmetric causal strength (m1=m2) and 4-parameter asymmetric (m1neqm2) variant.