mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Rewarding Novel Deductions: Solver-guided Process Supervision for Logical Reasoning

arXiv 2609.34660 ↗First posted 28 Sep 2026cs.CLcited by 0

On the map: LLM reasoning → Prompting and chain-of-thought reasoning also fits: Test-time compute and efficient thinking

Abstract (arXiv)

Logical reasoning remains a major challenge for large language models (LLMs), particularly on structured problems that require precise constraint tracking, consistency preservation, and multi-step deduction. This challenge is especially acute for small-scale LLMs, which are more prone to producing inconsistent, redundant, or brittle reasoning trajectories. Existing approaches for improving logical reasoning largely optimize for final-answer correctness, providing only weak supervision over the intermediate reasoning process. In this work, we propose SPRING: (Solver-guided Process Rewards for Novel LogIcal ReasoNing Step Generation). SPRING uses SMT solver as a training-time verifier of intermediate reasoning steps to provide process-level supervision. It introduces the notion of a novel reasoning step, namely, a step that is logically valid, consistent with the evolving reasoning state, and not already implied by previously accepted non-contradictory deductions. Based on this solver-based assessment, it designs process rewards that encourage novel inferential progress while penalizing contradictory and uninformative reasoning steps. Evaluation across three logical reasoning benchmarks, ZebraLogic, AR-LSAT, and Knights and Knaves, and four LLMs shows that SPRING consistently outperforms base LLMs, outcome-only reward baselines, and Logic-LM. On ZebraLogic, SPRING improves puzzle accuracy by up to 49.71 and 15.43 points over the base LLM and strongest outcome-only baseline, respectively. On AR-LSAT, it improves overall accuracy by up to 64.93 and 12.14 points, respectively. On Knights and Knaves, SPRING achieves up to 93.14 puzzle accuracy and 96.05 person accuracy.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Prompting and chain-of-thought reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 18 of its 23 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Sep 2026.

Builds on

18 of 23 references.

Closest ancestors · 3

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Small Models Struggle to Learn from Strong Reasoners17 Feb
  2. 2022Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners24 May
  3. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models28 Jan

Other references · 15

  1. 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,743
  2. 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 8,851
  3. 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,195
  4. 2023Let's Verify Step by Stepcited by 3,598
  5. 2025DAPO: An Open-Source LLM Reinforcement Learning System at Scalecited by 2,678
  6. 2023Math-Shepherd: Verify and Reinforce LLMs Step-by-step without Human Annotationscited by 895
  7. 2024GSM-Symbolic: Understanding the Limitations of Mathematical Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 533
  8. 2023Logic-LM: Empowering Large Language Models with Symbolic Solvers for Faithful Logical Reasoningcited by 379
  9. 2025ZebraLogic: On the Scaling Limits of LLMs for Logical Reasoningcited by 186
  10. 2023LINC: A Neurosymbolic Approach for Logical Reasoning by Combining Language Models with First-Order Logic Proverscited by 161
  11. 2025Phi-4-reasoning Technical Reportcited by 146
  12. 2024On Memorization of Large Language Models in Logical Reasoningcited by 114
3 more
  1. 2023SatLM: Satisfiability-Aided Language Models Using Declarative Promptingcited by 100
  2. 2025Making Small Language Models Efficient Reasoners: Intervention, Supervision, Reinforcementcited by 13
  3. 2024A Closer Look at Logical Reasoning with LLMs: The Choice of Tool Matterscited by 8

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2023Language Models can be Logical Solvers
  2. 2025Logical Reasoning with Outcome Reward Models for Test-Time Scaling
  3. 2024Improve Mathematical Reasoning in Language Models by Automated Process Supervision
  4. 2025Enhancing Logical Reasoning in Language Models via Symbolically-Guided Monte Carlo Process Supervision
  5. 2023Let's reward step by step: Step-Level reward model as the Navigators for Reasoning
  6. 2026Process Supervision for Chain-of-Thought Reasoning via Monte Carlo Net Information Gain
  7. 2025GroundedPRM: Tree-Guided and Fidelity-Aware Process Reward Modeling for Step-Level Reasoning
  8. 2026LogicTrack: Auditing Reasoning Trajectories of Large Language Models with Formal Logic Solvers