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

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.34660 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.34660/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 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.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Prompting and chain-of-thought reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/lr/prompting-and-chain-of-thought-reasoning/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 18 of 18)

- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.03300/) (2024)
- [Qwen3 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.09388/) (2025)
- [Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.11916/) (2022)
- [Let's Verify Step by Step](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.20050/) (2023)
- [DAPO: An Open-Source LLM Reinforcement Learning System at Scale](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.14476/) (2025)
- [Math-Shepherd: Verify and Reinforce LLMs Step-by-step without Human Annotations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.08935/) (2023)
- [GSM-Symbolic: Understanding the Limitations of Mathematical Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.05229/) (2024)
- [Logic-LM: Empowering Large Language Models with Symbolic Solvers for Faithful Logical Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.12295/) (2023)
- [ZebraLogic: On the Scaling Limits of LLMs for Logical Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.01100/) (2025)
- [LINC: A Neurosymbolic Approach for Logical Reasoning by Combining Language Models with First-Order Logic Provers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.15164/) (2023)
- [Phi-4-reasoning Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.21318/) (2025)
- [On Memorization of Large Language Models in Logical Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.23123/) (2024)
- [Small Models Struggle to Learn from Strong Reasoners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.12143/) (2025)
- [SatLM: Satisfiability-Aided Language Models Using Declarative Prompting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.09656/) (2023)
- [Making Small Language Models Efficient Reasoners: Intervention, Supervision, Reinforcement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.07961/) (2025)
- [A Closer Look at Logical Reasoning with LLMs: The Choice of Tool Matters](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.00284/) (2024)

## 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.