Large language models are few-shot learners that can solve diverse tasks from a handful of demonstrations. This implicit understanding of tasks suggests that the attention mechanisms over word tokens may play a role in analogical reasoning. In this work, we investigate whether analogical reasoning can enable in-context composition over composable elements of visual stimuli. First, we introduce a suite of three benchmarks to test the generalization properties of a visual in-context learner. We formalize the notion of an analogy-based in-context learner and use it to design a meta-learning framework called Im-Promptu.

Analogical reasoning is a powerful inductive mechanism, widely used in human cognition and increasingly applied in artificial intelligence. Formal frameworks for analogical inference have been developed for Boolean domains, where inference is provably sound for affine functions and approximately correct for functions close to affine. These results have informed the design of analogy-based classifiers. However, they do not extend to regression tasks or continuous domains. In this paper, we revisit analogical inference from a foundational perspective. We first present a counterexample showing that existing generalization bounds fail even in the Boolean setting. We then introduce a unified framework for analogical reasoning in real-valued domains based on parameterized analogies defined via generalized means. This model subsumes both Boolean classification and regression, and supports analogical inference over continuous functions. We characterize the class of analogy-preserving functions in this setting and derive both worst-case and average-case error bounds under smoothness assumptions. Our results offer a general theory of analogical inference across discrete and continuous domains.

Analogical reasoning is at the core of human cognition, serving as an important foundation for a variety of intellectual activities. While prior work has shown that LLMs can represent task patterns and surface-level concepts, it remains unclear whether these models can encode high-level relational concepts and apply them to novel situations through structured comparisons. In this work, we explore this fundamental aspect using proportional and story analogies, and identify three key findings. First, LLMs effectively encode the underlying relationships between analogous entities; both attributive and relational information propagate through mid-upper layers in correct cases, whereas reasoning failures reflect missing relational information within these layers. Second, unlike humans, LLMs often struggle not only when relational information is missing, but also when attempting to apply it to new entities. In such cases, strategically patching hidden representations at critical token positions can facilitate information transfer to a certain extent. Lastly, successful analogical reasoning in LLMs is marked by strong structural alignment between analogous situations, whereas failures often reflect degraded or misplaced alignment. Overall, our findings reveal that LLMs exhibit emerging but limited capabilities in encoding and applying high-level relational concepts, highlighting both parallels and gaps with human cognition.

Neural Information Processing Systems http://nips.cc/

Our solution tries to improve current machine learning models on this challenging reasoning task.

We validate our method on RA VEN dataset, on which it outperforms state-of-the-art method, with larger gains when the training data is scarce.

Analogical reasoning, the transfer of relational structures across contexts (e.g., planet is to sun as electron is to nucleus), is fundamental to scientific discovery. Yet human insight is often constrained by domain expertise and surface-level biases, limiting access to deeper, structure-driven analogies both within and across disciplines. Large language models (LLMs), trained on vast cross-domain data, present a promising yet underexplored tool for analogical reasoning in science. Here, we demonstrate that LLMs can generate novel battery materials by (1) retrieving cross-domain analogs and analogy-guided exemplars to steer exploration beyond conventional dopant substitutions, and (2) constructing in-domain analogical templates from few labeled examples to guide targeted exploitation. These explicit analogical reasoning strategies yield candidates outside established compositional spaces and outperform standard prompting baselines. Our findings position LLMs as interpretable, expert-like hypothesis generators that leverage analogy-driven generalization for scientific innovation.

Analogical reasoning lies at the core of human cognition and remains a fundamental challenge for artificial intelligence. Raven's Progressive Matrices (RPM) serve as a widely used benchmark to assess abstract reasoning by requiring the inference of underlying structural rules. While many vision-based and language-based models have achieved success on RPM tasks, it remains unclear whether their performance reflects genuine reasoning ability or reliance on statistical shortcuts. This study investigates the generalization capacity of modern AI systems under conditions of incomplete training by deliberately omitting several structural rules during training. Both sequence-to-sequence transformer models and vision-based architectures such as CoPINet and the Dual-Contrast Network are evaluated on the Impartial-RAVEN (I-RAVEN) dataset. Experiments reveal that although transformers demonstrate strong performance on familiar rules, their accuracy declines sharply when faced with novel or omitted rules. Moreover, the gap between token-level accuracy and complete answer accuracy highlights fundamental limitations in current approaches. These findings provide new insights into the reasoning mechanisms underlying deep learning models and underscore the need for architectures that move beyond pattern recognition toward robust abstract reasoning.

Neural Information Processing Systems http://nips.cc/

Our solution tries to improve current machine learning models on this challenging reasoning task.