LLMEval-Logic: A Solver-Verified Chinese Benchmark for Logical Reasoning of LLMs with Adversarial Hardening
On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation
Abstract (arXiv)
Existing logic benchmarks primarily measure models' ability to answer reasoning questions directly. Scalable benchmarks often generate text from formal structures, which makes answers easy to compute but fixes the formalization before the problem is written. Forward construction preserves the challenge of finding a faithful formalization, yet makes difficulty and answer reliability harder to control. We introduce HyperLogic, a forward-construction pipeline that separates problem authoring from answer generation. A multi-agent workflow hardens undergraduate-authored Chinese seeds without solving them; two agents from different model families independently translate each finished item into executable finite-domain models; their encodings and solver-derived answers undergo layered, agent-assisted adjudication under human-expert oversight. HyperLogic-Base contains 195 items and 922 sub-questions and separates seven frontier models by 33.0 percentage points in strict item accuracy (44.6-77.6%). HyperLogic-Hard contains 100 items with larger, coupled search spaces, on which no model exceeds 16% accuracy in direct answering. We also use Hard to evaluate agents' ability to formalize and solve problems with tools, comparing a code sandbox alone with one that includes our logic modeling library. The sandbox improves every model by 16.7-40.1 points; adding the library helps five models and hurts two. These results highlight the difficulty of faithful formalization even with tool access.
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 7 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 May 2026.
Builds on
7 of 36 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2025The Ouroboros of Benchmarking: Reasoning Evaluation in an Era of Saturation3 Nov
- 2025AutoLogi: Automated Generation of Logic Puzzles for Evaluating Reasoning Abilities of Large Language Models24 Feb
Other references · 5
- 2026DeepSeek-V4: Towards Highly Efficient Million-Token Context Intelligencecited by 1,040
- 2025Humanity's Last Examcited by 491
- 2024FrontierMath: A Benchmark for Evaluating Advanced Mathematical Reasoning in AIcited by 243
- 2020ReClor: A Reading Comprehension Dataset Requiring Logical Reasoningcited by 217
- 2026From 0-Order Selection to 2-Order Judgment: Combinatorial Hardening Exposes Compositional Failures in Frontier LLMscited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Logical Reasoning in Large Language Models: A Survey
- 2024LogicBench: Towards Systematic Evaluation of Logical Reasoning Ability of Large Language Models
- 2025HellaSwag-Pro: A Large-Scale Bilingual Benchmark for Evaluating the Robustness of LLMs in Commonsense Reasoning
- 2025DNR Bench: Benchmarking Over-Reasoning in Reasoning LLMs
- 2024Leveraging LLMs for Hypothetical Deduction in Logical Inference: A Neuro-Symbolic Approach
- 2025Rosetta-PL: Propositional Logic as a Benchmark for Large Language Model Reasoning
- 2025Investigating the Robustness of Deductive Reasoning with Large Language Models
- 2025Towards Reasoning Ability of Small Language Models