Michael K. Chen

AI
h-index9
5papers
32citations
Novelty48%
AI Score54

5 Papers

CLJan 24, 2025Code
JustLogic: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Evaluating Deductive Reasoning in Large Language Models

Michael K. Chen, Xikun Zhang, Dacheng Tao

Logical reasoning is a critical component of Large Language Models (LLMs), and substantial research efforts in recent years have aimed to enhance their deductive reasoning capabilities. However, existing deductive reasoning benchmarks, which are crucial for evaluating and advancing LLMs, are inadequate due to their lack of task complexity, presence of prior knowledge as a confounder, and superficial error analysis. To address these deficiencies, we introduce JustLogic, a synthetically generated deductive reasoning benchmark designed for rigorous evaluation of LLMs. JustLogic is (i) highly complex, capable of generating a diverse range of linguistic patterns, vocabulary, and argument structures; (ii) prior knowledge independent, eliminating the advantage of models possessing prior knowledge and ensuring that only deductive reasoning is used to answer questions; and (iii) capable of in-depth error analysis on the heterogeneous effects of reasoning depth and argument form on model accuracy. Our experimental results on JustLogic reveal that (i) state-of-the-art (SOTA) reasoning LLMs perform on par or better than the human average but significantly worse than the human ceiling, and (ii) SOTA non-reasoning models still underperform the human average. All code and data are available at https://github.com/michaelchen-lab/JustLogic

AIJun 30, 2025Code
MMReason: An Open-Ended Multi-Modal Multi-Step Reasoning Benchmark for MLLMs Toward AGI

Huanjin Yao, Jiaxing Huang, Yawen Qiu et al.

Reasoning plays a crucial role in advancing Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) toward Artificial General Intelligence. However, existing MLLM benchmarks often fall short in precisely and comprehensively evaluating long-chain reasoning abilities from three key aspects: (1) lack of difficulty and diversity, (2) susceptibility to guessability and memorization, (3) inadequate assessment of intermediate reasoning steps. To fill this gap, we introduce MMReason, a new benchmark designed to precisely and comprehensively evaluate MLLM long-chain reasoning capability with diverse, open-ended, challenging questions. First, we curate challenging questions requiring multi-step reasoning from various fields (i.e., 6 disciplines) and multiple difficulty levels (i.e., from pre-university to university, and from foundational to competition tiers). Second, these questions are reformulated into an open-ended format and filtered using a multi-model voting technique to eliminate shortcut cases related to guessing and memorization, ensuring robust reasoning evaluations. Third, we annotate the questions with detailed step-by-step solutions, and design a reference-based ternary scoring mechanism to reliably assess intermediate reasoning steps. With MMReason, we benchmark popular leading MLLMs and provide an in-depth analysis of their reasoning capabilities. We hope MMReason will serve as a valuable resource for advancing MLLM reasoning research. Code will be available at https://github.com/HJYao00/MMReason.

LGJun 9, 2025Code
Improving Large Language Models with Concept-Aware Fine-Tuning

Michael K. Chen, Xikun Zhang, Jiaxing Huang et al.

Large language models (LLMs) have become the cornerstone of modern AI. However, the existing paradigm of next-token prediction fundamentally limits their ability to form coherent, high-level concepts, making it a critical barrier to human-like understanding and reasoning. Take the phrase "ribonucleic acid" as an example: an LLM will first decompose it into tokens, i.e., artificial text fragments ("rib", "on", ...), then learn each token sequentially, rather than grasping the phrase as a unified, coherent semantic entity. This fragmented representation hinders deeper conceptual understanding and, ultimately, the development of truly intelligent systems. In response, we introduce Concept-Aware Fine-Tuning (CAFT), a novel multi-token training method that redefines how LLMs are fine-tuned. By enabling the learning of sequences that span multiple tokens, this method fosters stronger concept-aware learning. Our experiments demonstrate significant improvements compared to conventional next-token finetuning methods across diverse tasks, including traditional applications like text summarization and domain-specific ones like de novo protein design. Multi-token prediction was previously only possible in the prohibitively expensive pretraining phase; CAFT, to our knowledge, is the first to bring the multi-token setting to the post-training phase, thus effectively democratizing its benefits for the broader community of practitioners and researchers. Finally, the unexpected effectiveness of our proposed method suggests wider implications for the machine learning research community. All code and data are available at https://github.com/michaelchen-lab/caft-llm

29.4IRApr 30
How Generative AI Disrupts Search: An Empirical Study of Google Search, Gemini, and AI Overviews

Riley Grossman, Songjiang Liu, Michael K. Chen et al.

Generative AI is being increasingly integrated into web search for the convenience it provides users. In this work, we aim to understand how generative AI disrupts web search by retrieving and presenting the information and sources differently from traditional search engines. We introduce a public benchmark dataset of 11,500 user queries to support our study and future research of generative search. We compare the search results returned by Google's search engine, the accompanying AI Overview (AIO), and Gemini Flash 2.5 for each query. We have made several key findings. First, we find that for 51.5\% of representative, real-user queries, AIOs are generated, and are displayed above the organic search results. Controversial questions frequently result in an AIO. Second, we show that the retrieved sources are substantially different for each search engine (<0.2 average Jaccard similarity). Traditional Google search is significantly more likely to retrieve information from popular or institutional websites in government or education, while generative search engines are significantly more likely to retrieve Google-owned content. Third, we observe that websites that block Google's AI crawler are significantly less likely to be retrieved by AIOs, despite having access to the content. Finally, AIOs are less consistent when processing two runs of the same query, and are less robust to minor query edits. Our findings have important implications for understanding how generative search impacts website visibility, the effectiveness of generative engine optimization techniques, and the information users receive. We call for revenue frameworks to foster a sustainable and mutually beneficial ecosystem for publishers and generative search providers.

AIAug 5, 2025
A Comparative Study of Neurosymbolic AI Approaches to Interpretable Logical Reasoning

Michael K. Chen

General logical reasoning, defined as the ability to reason deductively on domain-agnostic tasks, continues to be a challenge for large language models (LLMs). Current LLMs fail to reason deterministically and are not interpretable. As such, there has been a recent surge in interest in neurosymbolic AI, which attempts to incorporate logic into neural networks. We first identify two main neurosymbolic approaches to improving logical reasoning: (i) the integrative approach comprising models where symbolic reasoning is contained within the neural network, and (ii) the hybrid approach comprising models where a symbolic solver, separate from the neural network, performs symbolic reasoning. Both contain AI systems with promising results on domain-specific logical reasoning benchmarks. However, their performance on domain-agnostic benchmarks is understudied. To the best of our knowledge, there has not been a comparison of the contrasting approaches that answers the following question: Which approach is more promising for developing general logical reasoning? To analyze their potential, the following best-in-class domain-agnostic models are introduced: Logic Neural Network (LNN), which uses the integrative approach, and LLM-Symbolic Solver (LLM-SS), which uses the hybrid approach. Using both models as case studies and representatives of each approach, our analysis demonstrates that the hybrid approach is more promising for developing general logical reasoning because (i) its reasoning chain is more interpretable, and (ii) it retains the capabilities and advantages of existing LLMs. To support future works using the hybrid approach, we propose a generalizable framework based on LLM-SS that is modular by design, model-agnostic, domain-agnostic, and requires little to no human input.