Large Language Models (LLMs) trained on massive corpora have shown remarkable success in knowledge-intensive tasks. Yet, most of them rely on pre-stored knowledge. Inducing new general knowledge from a specific environment andperforming reasoning with the acquired knowledge--situated inductive reasoning, is crucial and challenging for machine intelligence. In this paper, we design Mars, an interactive environment devised for situated inductive reasoning. It introduces counter-commonsense game mechanisms by modifying terrain, survival setting and task dependency while adhering to certain principles.

Yet, most of them rely on pre-stored knowledge. Inducing new general knowledge from a specific environment and performing reasoning with the acquired knowledge--situated inductive reasoning, is crucial and challenging for machine intelligence. In this paper, we design Mars, an interactive environment devised for situated inductive reasoning.

Large language models (LLMs) make remarkable progress in reasoning tasks. Among different reasoning modes, inductive reasoning, due to its better alignment with human learning, attracts increasing interest. However, research on inductive reasoning faces certain challenges. First, existing inductive data mostly focuses on superficial regularities while lacking more complex internal patterns. Second, current works merely prompt LLMs or finetune on simple prompt-response pairs, but do not provide precise thinking processes nor implement difficulty control. Unlike previous work, we address these challenges by introducing \textit{CodeSeq}, a synthetic post-training dataset built from number sequences. We package number sequences into algorithmic problems to discover their general terms, defining a general term generation (GTG) task correspondingly. Our pipeline generates supervised finetuning data by reflecting on failed test cases and incorporating iterative corrections, thereby teaching LLMs to learn autonomous case generation and self-checking. Additionally, it leverages reinforcement learning with a novel Case-Synergy Solvability Scaling Reward based on both solvability, estimated from the problem pass rate, and the success rate of self-directed case generation, enabling models to learn more effectively from both successes and failures. Experimental results show that the models trained with \textit{CodeSeq} improve on various reasoning tasks and can preserve the models' OOD performance.

Reasoning is an important task for large language models (LLMs). Among all the reasoning paradigms, inductive reasoning is one of the fundamental types, which is characterized by its particular-to-general thinking process and the non-uniqueness of its answers. The inductive mode is crucial for knowledge generalization and aligns better with human cognition, so it is a fundamental mode of learning, hence attracting increasing interest. Despite the importance of inductive reasoning, there is no systematic summary of it. Therefore, this paper presents the first comprehensive survey of inductive reasoning for LLMs. First, methods for improving inductive reasoning are categorized into three main areas: post-training, test-time scaling, and data augmentation. Then, current benchmarks of inductive reasoning are summarized, and a unified sandbox-based evaluation approach with the observation coverage metric is derived. Finally, we offer some analyses regarding the source of inductive ability and how simple model architectures and data help with inductive tasks, providing a solid foundation for future research.

Large Language Models (LLMs) trained on massive corpora have shown remarkable success in knowledge-intensive tasks. Y et, most of them rely on pre-stored knowledge. Inducing new general knowledge from a specific environment and performing reasoning with the acquired knowledge-- situated inductive reasoning, is crucial and challenging for machine intelligence. In this paper, we design Mars, an interactive environment devised for situated inductive reasoning. It introduces counter-commonsense game mechanisms by modifying terrain, survival setting and task dependency while adhering to certain principles.

Conducting contamination-free evaluation of mathematical capabilities can be difficult for two reasons: models may memorize a test set once it is made public, and current mathematical benchmarks are prone to overfitting due to having limited diversity of symbols and rules, coupled with closed-ended answers. This paper proposes a method to leverage these shortcomings as useful features to a construct dynamic, counterfactual benchmark, which can be used to both reveal overfitting and measure true reasoning. We demonstrate this via MatheMagic, which generates math test instances with the interpretations of numbers and operators altered, yet has automatically verifiable answers. Test instances are randomly seeded and constructed at test time to evaluate a model's induction or deduction capability, offering stability, extensibility, comparability, and robustness to overfitting. Our experiments find that models solve deduction more easily than induction, but they revert to standard math. Further analysis reveals that math-adapted models fail to exhibit a general "skill" of reasoning, and fine-tuning on induction tasks generalizes poorly.

As large language models (LLMs) increasingly exhibit human-like capabilities, a fundamental question emerges: How can we enable LLMs to learn the underlying patterns from limited examples in entirely novel environments and apply them effectively? This question is central to the ability of LLMs in inductive reasoning. Existing research on LLM-based inductive reasoning can be broadly categorized based on whether the underlying rules are expressible via explicit mathematical equations. However, many recent studies in the beyond-equations category have emphasized rule design without grounding them in specific scenarios. Inspired by the parallels between inductive reasoning and human scientific discovery, we propose the task of LLM-Based Scientific Inductive Reasoning Beyond Equations and introduce a new benchmark, SIRBench-V1, to evaluate the inductive reasoning abilities of LLMs in scientific settings. Our experimental results show that current LLMs still struggle with this task, underscoring its difficulty and the need for further advancement in this area.

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated significant success in complex reasoning tasks such as math and coding. In contrast to these tasks where deductive reasoning predominates, inductive reasoning-the ability to derive general rules from incomplete evidence, remains underexplored. This paper investigates extended inductive reasoning in LLMs through the lens of personalized preference inference, a critical challenge in LLM alignment where current approaches struggle to capture diverse user preferences. The task demands strong inductive reasoning capabilities as user preferences are typically embedded implicitly across various interaction forms, requiring models to synthesize consistent preference patterns from scattered signals. We propose AlignXplore, a model that leverages extended reasoning chains to enable systematic preference inference from behavioral signals in users' interaction histories. Such explicit preference articulation enables efficient streaming inference: when new behavioral signals emerge, the model can directly build upon previously inferred preference descriptions rather than reprocessing historical signals from scratch, while also supporting iterative refinement to the inferred preferences. We develop AlignXplore by combining cold-start training based on synthetic data with subsequent online reinforcement learning. Through extensive experiments, we demonstrate that AlignXplore achieves substantial improvements over the backbone model by an average of 15.49\% on in-domain and out-of-domain benchmarks, while maintaining strong generalization ability across different input formats and downstream models. Further analyses establish best practices for preference inference learning through systematic comparison of reward modeling strategies, while revealing the emergence of human-like inductive reasoning patterns during training.

Large reasoning models (LRMs) generate complex reasoning traces with planning, reflection, verification, and backtracking. In this work, we introduce ReasoningFlow, a unified schema for analyzing the semantic structures of these complex traces. ReasoningFlow parses traces into directed acyclic graphs, enabling the characterization of distinct reasoning patterns as subgraph structures. This human-interpretable representation offers promising applications in understanding, evaluating, and enhancing the reasoning processes of LRMs.

Large Language Models (LLMs) trained on massive corpora have shown remarkable success in knowledge-intensive tasks. Yet, most of them rely on pre-stored knowledge. Inducing new general knowledge from a specific environment andperforming reasoning with the acquired knowledge--situated inductive reasoning, is crucial and challenging for machine intelligence. In this paper, we design Mars, an interactive environment devised for situated inductive reasoning. It introduces counter-commonsense game mechanisms by modifying terrain, survival setting and task dependency while adhering to certain principles.