Beyond Memorization: Distinguishing between Reductive and Epistemic Reasoning in LLMs using Classic Logic Puzzles

arXiv cs.CL / 3/24/2026

💬 OpinionIdeas & Deep AnalysisModels & Research

Key Points

  • The paper argues that earlier evaluations of LLMs on epistemic logic puzzles oversimplified model behavior as either epistemic reasoning or brittle memorization.
  • It reframes memorization as a form of reductive reasoning, where a new puzzle instance is mapped onto a previously known canonical problem.
  • The authors introduce a “reduction ladder,” applying systematic instance modifications that preserve the core logic while making reduction to the canonical puzzle progressively harder.
  • Results show that some large models can still solve puzzles through reduction, but others fail early, and all models struggle once tasks require genuine epistemic reasoning.

Abstract

Epistemic reasoning requires agents to infer the state of the world from partial observations and information about other agents' knowledge. Prior work evaluating LLMs on canonical epistemic puzzles interpreted their behavior through a dichotomy between epistemic reasoning and brittle memorization. We argue that this framing is incomplete: in recent models, memorization is better understood as a special case of reduction, where a new instance is mapped onto a known problem. Instead, we introduce a reduction ladder, a sequence of modifications that progressively move instances away from a canonical epistemic puzzle, making reduction increasingly difficult while preserving the underlying logic. We find that while some large models succeed via reduction, other models fail early, and all models struggle once epistemic reasoning is required.