用乔姆斯基层级系统评估大模型形式推理能力,发现其效率远低于传统程序。
Evaluating the Formal Reasoning Capabilities of Large Language Models through Chomsky Hierarchy

- 基于乔姆斯基层级设计多任务评测集,支持自然语言过程追踪与符号可验证。
- 模型性能随语言复杂度提升而显著下降,大模型仍需极高算力才能可靠运行。
- 适合关注大模型形式推理边界与软件工程应用的开发者和研究者。
大语言模型的形式推理能力对推动自动化软件工程至关重要。然而,现有评测缺乏基于计算与复杂性的系统性评估,导致难以理解当前顶尖模型是否能把握形式语言的结构化层次复杂性。为此,我们提出 ChomskyBench,首个基于乔姆斯基层级系统的系统性评测基准。该基准涵盖完整层级的语言识别与生成任务,结合自然语言过程追踪与确定性符号可验证性,突破了以往向量分类范式。大量实验显示,模型表现明显分层,与层级复杂度直接相关:任务难度上升导致推理长度和错误率显著增加。尽管更大模型与先进推理方法带来相对提升,但实际可靠性需付出极高计算成本,表明瓶颈在于效率而非能力上限。时间复杂度分析进一步显示,大模型在这些形式任务上远不如传统算法程序高效。结果揭示了当前大模型的实际局限,强调传统软件工具不可替代,并为未来具备更强形式推理能力的大模型开发提供指导。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
The formal reasoning capabilities of LLMs are crucial for advancing automated software engineering. However, existing benchmarks for LLMs lack systematic evaluation based on computation and complexity, leaving a critical gap in understanding their formal reasoning capabilities. Therefore, it is still unknown whether SOTA LLMs can grasp the structured, hierarchical complexity of formal languages as defined by Computation Theory. To address this, we introduce ChomskyBench, a benchmark for systematically evaluating LLMs through the lens of Chomsky Hierarchy. Unlike prior work that uses vectorized classification for neural networks, ChomskyBench is the first to combine full Chomsky Hierarchy coverage, process-trace evaluation via natural language, and deterministic symbolic verifiability. ChomskyBench is composed of a comprehensive suite of language recognition and generation tasks designed to test capabilities at each level. Extensive experiments indicate a clear performance stratification that correlates with the hierarchy's levels of complexity. Our analysis reveals a direct relationship where increasing task difficulty substantially impacts both inference length and performance. Furthermore, we find that while larger models and advanced inference methods offer notable relative gains, they face severe efficiency barriers: achieving practical reliability would require prohibitive computational costs, revealing that current limitations stem from inefficiency rather than absolute capability bounds. A time complexity analysis further indicates that LLMs are significantly less efficient than traditional algorithmic programs for these formal tasks. These results delineate the practical limits of current LLMs, highlight the indispensability of traditional software tools, and provide insights to guide the development of future LLMs with more powerful formal reasoning capabilities.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。