In this paper we examine the limitations of Large Language Models (LLMs) for complex reasoning tasks. Although recent works have started to employ formal languages as an intermediate representation for reasoning tasks, they often face challenges in accurately generating and refining these formal specifications to ensure correctness. To address these issues, this paper proposes Logic-LM++, an improvement on Logic-LM . It uses the ability of LLMs to do pairwise comparisons, allowing the evaluation of the refinements suggested by the LLM. The paper demonstrates that Logic-LM++ outperforms Logic-LM and other contemporary techniques across natural language reasoning tasks on three datasets, FOLIO, ProofWriter and AR-LSAT, with an average improvement of 18.5% on standard prompting, 12.3% on chain of thought prompting and 5% on Logic-LM.

Theory of Mind (ToM) refers to the ability of individuals to attribute mental states to others. While Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown some promise with ToM ability, they still struggle with complex ToM reasoning. Our approach leverages an external symbolic executor, specifically the SMCDEL model checker, and fine-tuning to improve the ToM reasoning ability of LLMs. In our approach, an LLM is first fine-tuned through pairs of natural language and symbolic formulation representation of ToM problems and is then instructed to generate the symbolic formulation with a one-shot in-context example. The generated symbolic formulation is then executed by the SMCDEL model checker to perform transparent and verifiable ToM reasoning and give the final result. We demonstrate that our approach, ToM-LM, shows a significant improvement over all the constructed baselines. Our study proposes a novel view about externalizing a particular component of ToM reasoning, mainly reasoning about beliefs, and suggests generalizing it to other aspects of ToM reasoning.