Strategy-Induct: Task-Level Strategy Induction for Instruction Generation (2026.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods for task-level instruction generation rely on input-output pairs . obtaining labeled answers can be difficult or costly, limiting generalization across architectures. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework that derives task-level instructions solely from a small set of example questions without requiring labeled answers. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework outperforms state-of-the-art methods in question-only settings. |
Similar Papers
Induct-Learn: Short Phrase Prompting with Instruction Induction (2024.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods for generating instructions from demonstrations rely on large datasets or numerous examples, which is impractical and costly in real-world scenarios. |
| Approach: | They propose a task-level framework that induces pseudo instructions from a few demonstrations and a short phrase, adding a CoT process into existing demonstrations. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework outperforms state-of-the-art methods on two datasets and exhibits cross-model adaptability and lower cost. |
Instruction Induction: From Few Examples to Natural Language Task Descriptions (2023.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large language models can perform unseen tasks by conditioning on a few input-output demonstrations, but task inference is implicit and the ability of models to explicitly reason about it remains unexplored. |
| Approach: | They propose an instruction induction challenge in which a model is asked to generate a natural language instruction that fits a set of labeled examples. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model achieves 65.7% of human performance while the original model only reaches 9.8% of human performances. |
A Survey of Inductive Reasoning for Large Language Models (2026.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Kedi Chen, Dezhao Ruan, Yuhao Dan, Yaoting Wang, Siyu Yan, Xuecheng Wu, Yinqi Zhang, Qin Chen, Jie Zhou, Liang He, Biqing Qi, Linyang Li, Qipeng Guo, Xiaoming Shi, Wei Zhang
| Challenge: | Inductive reasoning is an important task for large language models (LLMs). |
| Approach: | They propose a survey of inductive reasoning for large language models . they categorize methods into three main areas: post-training enhancement, test-time exploration, and data augmentation. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method improves inductive reasoning in large language models. |
A Comprehensive Evaluation of Inductive Reasoning Capabilities and Problem Solving in Large Language Models (2024.findings-eacl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Inductive reasoning is fundamental to both human and artificial intelligence. |
| Approach: | They evaluated the inductive reasoning abilities of current Large Language Models (LLMs) and their performance on symbolic tasks. |
| Outcome: | The proposed models fail on symbolic tasks and show that chain-of-thought prompts help them by decomposing the problem-solving process, but the LLMs learn limitedly. |
Task-Level Instructions Induction for Audio Question Answering from Few Examples (2026.eacl-short)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large audio-language models benefit from Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting for audio question answering (AQA) however, acquiring audio CoT examples is difficult as it requires sequential listening and careful integration of acoustic and linguistic information. |
| Approach: | They propose a method which induces reusable task instructions from few audio examples once per task. |
| Outcome: | Evaluated on 9 LALMs across two benchmarks, Audio-Induct outperforms state-of-the-art prompting methods while maintaining low inference costs. |
Inductive Linguistic Reasoning with Large Language Models (2025.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Evaluating large language models (LLMs) on their linguistic reasoning capabilities is an important task to understand the gaps in their skills that may surface during large-scale adoption. |
| Approach: | They propose to generate analogical exemplars with a language model and apply them in-context with target language exemplar. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method can be applied to other tasks present in Linguistics Olympiad competitions and achieves state-of-the-art results across nearly all problem types and difficulty levels in the LINGOLY dataset. |
Enhancing Large Language Models Against Inductive Instructions with Dual-critique Prompting (2024.naacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing studies have focused on how LLMs handle inductive instructions, which may stem from users’ false beliefs or malicious intents. |
| Approach: | They propose a benchmark of Inductive Instructions where false knowledge is incorporated into instructions in multiple different styles. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model improves robustness against inductive instructions, despite different inductive styles and complexity. |
The Role of Deductive and Inductive Reasoning in Large Language Models (2025.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Chengkun Cai, Xu Zhao, Haoliang Liu, Zhongyu Jiang, Tianfang Zhang, Zongkai Wu, Jenq-Neng Hwang, Lei Li
| Challenge: | Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities in reasoning tasks, yet their reliability in problem-solving remains debatable. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework that integrates both deductive and inductive reasoning approaches to enhance LLM reasoning by progressively adapting its reasoning pathways based on problem complexity. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework achieves 70.3% accuracy on AIW, compared to 62.2% for Tree of Thought, while maintaining lower computational costs. |
LogiDynamics: Unraveling the Dynamics of Inductive, Abductive and Deductive Logical Inferences in LLM Reasoning (2025.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
Tianshi Zheng, Cheng Jiayang, Chunyang Li, Haochen Shi, Zihao Wang, Jiaxin Bai, Yangqiu Song, Ginny Wong, Simon See
| Challenge: | Modern large language models (LLMs) employ diverse logical inference mechanisms for reasoning. |
| Approach: | They analyze the comparative dynamics of inductive (System 1) versus abductive/deductive (system 2) inference in large language models by using a controlled analogical reasoning environment and a MCQ/free-text task format. |
| Outcome: | The proposed methods can significantly scale LLM reasoning. |
Exploring Deductive and Inductive Reasoning Capabilities of Large Language Models in Procedural Planning (2025.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Deductive and inductive reasoning are fundamental components of human cognition . authors present a benchmark to assess their performance in procedural planning . |
| Approach: | They propose a benchmark to assess the deductive and inductive reasoning abilities of LLMs . they propose IMSE to enable LLM to generate multiple similar procedural plans . |
| Outcome: | The proposed method improves inductive reasoning abilities of LLMs, the authors show . they show that LLM models show excellent deductive reasoning capabilities but suboptimal inductive performance. |