Normative Reasoning in Large Language Models: A Comparative Benchmark from Logical and Modal Perspectives

Fuente: arXiv
Salvato in:
Dettagli Bibliografici
Autori principali: Ozeki, Kentaro, Ando, Risako, Morishita, Takanobu, Abe, Hirohiko, Mineshima, Koji, Okada, Mitsuhiro
Natura: Preprint
Pubblicazione: 2025
Soggetti:
Accesso online:
Tags: Aggiungi Tag
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!
_version_ 1866911242434641920
author Ozeki, Kentaro
Ando, Risako
Morishita, Takanobu
Abe, Hirohiko
Mineshima, Koji
Okada, Mitsuhiro
author_facet Ozeki, Kentaro
Ando, Risako
Morishita, Takanobu
Abe, Hirohiko
Mineshima, Koji
Okada, Mitsuhiro
contents Normative reasoning is a type of reasoning that involves normative or deontic modality, such as obligation and permission. While large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance across various reasoning tasks, their ability to handle normative reasoning remains underexplored. In this paper, we systematically evaluate LLMs' reasoning capabilities in the normative domain from both logical and modal perspectives. Specifically, to assess how well LLMs reason with normative modals, we make a comparison between their reasoning with normative modals and their reasoning with epistemic modals, which share a common formal structure. To this end, we introduce a new dataset covering a wide range of formal patterns of reasoning in both normative and epistemic domains, while also incorporating non-formal cognitive factors that influence human reasoning. Our results indicate that, although LLMs generally adhere to valid reasoning patterns, they exhibit notable inconsistencies in specific types of normative reasoning and display cognitive biases similar to those observed in psychological studies of human reasoning. These findings highlight challenges in achieving logical consistency in LLMs' normative reasoning and provide insights for enhancing their reliability. All data and code are released publicly at https://github.com/kmineshima/NeuBAROCO.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2510_26606
institution arXiv
publishDate 2025
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Normative Reasoning in Large Language Models: A Comparative Benchmark from Logical and Modal Perspectives
Ozeki, Kentaro
Ando, Risako
Morishita, Takanobu
Abe, Hirohiko
Mineshima, Koji
Okada, Mitsuhiro
Artificial Intelligence
Computation and Language
Normative reasoning is a type of reasoning that involves normative or deontic modality, such as obligation and permission. While large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance across various reasoning tasks, their ability to handle normative reasoning remains underexplored. In this paper, we systematically evaluate LLMs' reasoning capabilities in the normative domain from both logical and modal perspectives. Specifically, to assess how well LLMs reason with normative modals, we make a comparison between their reasoning with normative modals and their reasoning with epistemic modals, which share a common formal structure. To this end, we introduce a new dataset covering a wide range of formal patterns of reasoning in both normative and epistemic domains, while also incorporating non-formal cognitive factors that influence human reasoning. Our results indicate that, although LLMs generally adhere to valid reasoning patterns, they exhibit notable inconsistencies in specific types of normative reasoning and display cognitive biases similar to those observed in psychological studies of human reasoning. These findings highlight challenges in achieving logical consistency in LLMs' normative reasoning and provide insights for enhancing their reliability. All data and code are released publicly at https://github.com/kmineshima/NeuBAROCO.
title Normative Reasoning in Large Language Models: A Comparative Benchmark from Logical and Modal Perspectives
topic Artificial Intelligence
Computation and Language
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.26606