Evaluating Causal Reasoning in LLMs: A Case Study in the Challenges of Procedural Generation

2026-10-31 12:00 arXiv cs.AI Justin Clarke, Isha Karn, Patrick Murray, KJ Hill, David Jensen 约 11 分钟读完

Large language models (LLMs) appear to represent and reason about a large range of phenomena. In particular, recent studies have examined whether LLMs can accurately reason about causation. One of the most commonly used benchmarks for evaluating formal causal reasoning in LLMs is CLadder, a framewor…

Authors: Justin Clarke , Isha Karn , Patrick Murray , KJ Hill , David Jensen

View a PDF of the paper titled Evaluating Causal Reasoning in LLMs: A Case Study in the Challenges of Procedural Generation, by Justin Clarke and 4 other authors

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) appear to represent and reason about a large range of phenomena. In particular, recent studies have examined whether LLMs can accurately reason about causation. One of the most commonly used benchmarks for evaluating formal causal reasoning in LLMs is CLadder, a framework for procedural generation of benchmark data sets that was released in 2023. Experiments with CLadder appear to indicate that LLMs can perform formal causal reasoning in a large percentage of generated examples. In this paper, we examine what can be reliably inferred when LLMs perform well on test sets produced by CLadder. We identify several examples of superficial and highly predictive patterns that the CLadder generator embeds in data sets it generates. We find that even simple models such as random forests perform well on CLadder-generated data sets after training on a sample of generated data. We also find that the performance of many commercial LLMs on CLadder test sets is extremely brittle and that removing large sections of the text that are critical for formal causal reasoning has almost no effect on performance. Given these results, the most likely hypothesis for the strong performance of state-of-the-art LLMs on CLadder is that they are exploiting superficial patterns learned from exposure to training data from the generator. Any inference that LLMs are exhibiting more complex causal reasoning must rule out this hypothesis.

Subjects:

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI) ; Machine Learning (cs.LG)

Cite as:

arXiv:2610.38100 [cs.AI]

(or

arXiv:2610.38100v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.38100

Focus to learn more

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

Submission history

From: Isha Karn [ view email ]

[v1]

Wed, 28 Oct 2026 00:34:36 UTC (1,081 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled Evaluating Causal Reasoning in LLMs: A Case Study in the Challenges of Procedural Generation, by Justin Clarke and 4 other authors

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Additional Features

Audio Summary

Current browse context:

cs.AI

< prev

next >

new

recent

| 2026-10

Change to browse by:

cs.LG

References & Citations

SciX

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

export BibTeX citation

BibTeX formatted citation

Data provided by:

Bookmark

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer ( What is the Explorer? )

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers ( What is Connected Papers? )

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps ( What is Litmaps? )

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations ( What are Smart Citations? )

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv ( What is alphaXiv? )

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers ( What is CatalyzeX? )

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub ( What is DagsHub? )

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub ( What is GotitPub? )

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face ( What is Huggingface? )

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast ( What is ScienceCast? )

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate ( What is Replicate? )

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces ( What is Spaces? )

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI ( What is TXYZ.AI? )