# Scientific Logicality Enriched Methodology for LLM Reasoning: A Practice in Physics

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.17104 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.17104/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Spatial and embodied reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 25 of its 59 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 16 May 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Spatial and embodied reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/lr/spatial-and-embodied-reasoning/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 25 of 25)

- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.12948/) (2025)
- [Qwen2.5 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.15115/) (2024)
- [Let's Verify Step by Step](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.20050/) (2023)
- [GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.12022/) (2023)
- [Plan-and-Solve Prompting: Improving Zero-Shot Chain-of-Thought Reasoning by Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.04091/) (2023)
- [ProcessBench: Identifying Process Errors in Mathematical Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.06559/) (2024)
- [SciBench: Evaluating College-Level Scientific Problem-Solving Abilities of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.10635/) (2023)
- [PRMBench: A Fine-grained and Challenging Benchmark for Process-Level Reward Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.03124/) (2025)
- [A Comprehensive Survey of Scientific Large Language Models and Their Applications in Scientific Discovery](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.10833/) (2024)
- [From Automation to Autonomy: A Survey on Large Language Models in Scientific Discovery](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.13259/) (2025)
- [NaturalReasoning: Reasoning in the Wild with 2.8M Challenging Questions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.13124/) (2025)
- [A Chain-of-Thought Is as Strong as Its Weakest Link: A Benchmark for Verifiers of Reasoning Chains](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.00559/) (2024)
- [PhysReason: A Comprehensive Benchmark towards Physics-Based Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.12054/) (2025)
- [MegaScience: Pushing the Frontiers of Post-Training Datasets for Science Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.16812/) (2025)
- [UGPhysics: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Undergraduate Physics Reasoning with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.00334/) (2025)
- [SciInstruct: a Self-Reflective Instruction Annotated Dataset for Training Scientific Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.07950/) (2024)
- [A Survey of Scientific Large Language Models: From Data Foundations to Agent Frontiers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.21148/) (2025)
- [SCP-116K: A High-Quality Problem-Solution Dataset and a Generalized Pipeline for Automated Extraction in the Higher Education Science Domain](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.15587/) (2025)
- [Physics: Benchmarking Foundation Models on University-Level Physics Problem Solving](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.21821/) (2025)
- [VerifyBench: A Systematic Benchmark for Evaluating Reasoning Verifiers Across Domains](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.09884/) (2025)
- [Thought Branches: Interpreting LLM Reasoning Requires Resampling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.27484/) (2025)
- [On the Diagnostic of Road Pathway Visibility](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1601.05535/) (2016)
- [PRISM-Physics: Causal DAG-Based Process Evaluation for Physics Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.03185/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [A Verifier-Guided Explainable Reasoning Framework with Gold-Anchored QLoRA, Task-Aware Mixture-of-Experts, and Group-Relative RLVR](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.05221/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

With the continuous advancement of reasoning abilities in Large Language Models (LLMs), their application to scientific reasoning tasks has gained significant research attention. Current research primarily emphasizes boosting LLMs' performance on scientific QA benchmarks by training on larger, more comprehensive datasets with extended reasoning chains. However, these approaches neglect the essence of the scientific reasoning process -- logicality, which is the rational foundation to ensure the validity of reasoning steps leading to reliable conclusions. In this work, we make the first systematic investigation into the internal logicality underlying LLM scientific reasoning, and develop a scientific logicality-enriched methodology, including a set of assessment criteria and data sampling methods for logicality-guided training, to improve the logical faithfulness as well as task performance. Further, we take physics, characterized by its diverse logical structures and formalisms, as an exemplar discipline to practise the above methodology. For data construction, we extract scientific problems from academic literature and sample a high-quality dataset exhibiting strong logicality. Experiments based on three different backbone LLMs reveal that: 1) the training data we constructed can effectively improve the scientific logicality in LLM reasoning; and 2) the enriched scientific logicality plays a critical role in solving scientific problems. Code is available at hrefhttps://github.com/ScienceOne-AI/PhysLogichttps://github.com/ScienceOne-AI/PhysLogic.