2026· SemEval@ACL· pp. 3408-3421· 1 citation· 25 references
Computer Science
TL;DR
It is shown that a modestly-sized model can achieve near-perfect logical reasoning on the English validity-only subtask, and large reductions in content effect on multilingual and premise-retrieval variants, when augmented with a multi-stage neuro-symbolic pipeline.
Abstract
In this paper, we present the solution submitted by TUCNLP at SemEval-2026 Task 11: Disentangling Content and Formal Reasoning in Large Language Models. The task requires predicting the formal validity of categorical syllogisms while minimizing susceptibility to content-driven biases in English and 11 additional languages. We show that a modestly-sized model (Qwen3-8B) can achieve near-perfect logical reasoning on the English validity-only subtask, and large reductions in content effect on multilingual and premise-retrieval variants, when augmented with a multi-stage neuro-symbolic pipeline: LLM-based content stripping with iterative error correction converts natural language to abstract categorical forms, a classical symbolic parser validates against the twenty-four Aristotelian syllogistic forms, and asymmetric confidence thresholds mediate between symbolic and neural decisions. Across the four subtasks (ST1 to ST4), our system achieves accuracy ranging from 91.1% to 100% and bias-penalized ranking scores ( M ) from 31.8 to 100.0, with the main bottleneck being overconfident neural predictions that bypass symbolic verification.
Neurosymbolic reasoning has shown promising success in addressing complex reasoning tasks by combining large language models (LLMs) and symbolic solvers. While this approach shows promise, a fundamental challenge remains: improving the accuracy of translations from natural language to logical formulas. Current methods predominantly rely on prompt engineering, which is difficult to scale across different domains and input formats. Drawing inspiration from the success of fine-tuning in other model adaptation and alignment applications, we propose a fine-tuning-based Stratified Consistency Distillation approach: (1) We generate K logical translations per input using a frontier LLM and cluster them by semantic equivalence (2) Based on the entropy level, we apply majority voting (low entropy), LLM-as-a-Judge (medium entropy), or unification/abstention (high entropy), and (3) fine-tune a smaller model using the selected pseudo-labels. Our experiments show significant and consistent improvements in both Pass@K and our novel Equivalent Logical Similarity metrics, demonstrating the potential of advancing logical translation through consistency distillation.
Zhi-Chao Hou, Ferhat Erata, Joseph Lilien et al.· 0 citations
FinMMEval 2026 Task 1 evaluates multilingual financial multiple-choice question answering in English, Chinese, Arabic, and Hindi. The task tests whether systems can select the correct answer to finance questions involving domain terminology, numerical interpretation, and conceptual financial reasoning across languages and scripts. The final-test set contains 800 questions, with 200 questions per language; gold answers were withheld during submission, and each language was ranked independently by accuracy. The final leaderboards contain 13 English, 11 Chinese, 11 Arabic, and 10 Hindi ranked submissions. Top accuracies range from 92.0% in Hindi to 97.5% in English and Arabic, with the same leading teams appearing near the top across all four languages. The documented systems used retrieval augmentation, direct answer-option scoring, language-specific prompting, selective self-consistency, confidence checks, and LLM-based review stages.
Zhuohan Xie, Yuyang Dai, R. Elbadry et al.· 1 citation
Reasoning in LLMs is overwhelmingly studied in domains that provide a model with rules: mathematics and code. Linguistic puzzles invert this: the solver must first discover the system before reasoning within it. We present the IOL-AI Challenge, an open-science competition run on the unseen problems of the International Linguistics Olympiad (IOL) 2026 Individual Contest, evaluated both automatically and, for the first time, by members of the official IOL Jury under the same rubrics applied to human contestants. The challenge drew 731 submissions from 46 teams under a strict compute budget (one T4, 30 mins). We additionally benchmark 15 unconstrained frontier and open models, with Claude Opus 4.8 earning a jury score equivalent to a gold medal, while both resource-constrained systems we submitted for jury grading scored in the range of the bottom 5% of contestants. Capability was not determined by scale: 14B submissions outperform models twice their size, and gains come from decoding and output-handling rather than model capacity. We also found that automatic metrics rank systems exactly as the jury does, but compress the scale, upscoring weak systems by ~13 points and understating strong ones. Our analysis shows that while frontier models might have prior knowledge about some of the problem languages, it does not significantly help them solve the linguistic reasoning tasks, leaving linguistic reasoning as a strong benchmarking proxy for generalizable reasoning skills.
Eduardo Sánchez, Rita Berrada, Dan-Mircea Mirea et al.· 0 citations
