arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 2403.16097

Can Language Models Pretend Solvers? Logic Code Simulation with LLMs

Abstract

Transformer-based large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated significant potential in addressing logic problems. capitalizing on the great capabilities of LLMs for code-related activities, several frameworks leveraging logical solvers for logic reasoning have been proposed recently. While existing research predominantly focuses on viewing LLMs as natural language logic solvers or translators, their roles as logic code interpreters and executors have received limited attention. This study delves into a novel aspect, namely logic code simulation, which forces LLMs to emulate logical solvers in predicting the results of logical programs. To further investigate this novel task, we formulate our three research questions: Can LLMs efficiently simulate the outputs of logic codes? What strength arises along with logic code simulation? And what pitfalls? To address these inquiries, we curate three novel datasets tailored for the logic code simulation task and undertake thorough experiments to establish the baseline performance of LLMs in code simulation. Subsequently, we introduce a pioneering LLM-based code simulation technique, Dual Chains of Logic (DCoL). This technique advocates a dual-path thinking approach for LLMs, which has demonstrated state-of-the-art performance compared to other LLM prompt strategies, achieving a notable improvement in accuracy by 7.06% with GPT-4-Turbo.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Minyu Chen, Guoqiang Li, Ling-I Wu, Ruibang Liu, Yuxin Su, Xi Chang, Jianxin Xue. 2024-03-24. Can Language Models Pretend Solvers? Logic Code Simulation with LLMs. https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.16097

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI