Logical Misconceptions, Pragmatic Insufficiencies in LLMs and How to Fix Them

Abstract Despite great performance on many tasks, language models (LMs) still struggle with reasoning, sometimes providing responses that cannot possibly be true because they stem from logical incoherence. Extending on the arguments of Asher and Bhar (2024), we show that logical incoherencies follow from an LLM’s computation of its internal representations, in particular from an LLM’s failure to take account of the different roles that different expressions may play in determining content. Linguistics and logicians have shown the importance of the fact that logical operators provide a structure on which to compute content recursively. We extend this view of logical tokens to structure at the discursive level with an eye to improving pragmatic reasoning as well as deductive reasoning. The key in reasoning is that these structures introduce operations over an LM’s latent representations that constrain how they may evolve . We show how LLMs can leverage those structures.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Topoi
Published
2026-07-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-026-10459-6
Primary Topic
Natural Language Processing Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Logical Misconceptions, Pragmatic Insufficiencies in LLMs and How to Fix Them

Nicholas Asher, Swarnadeep Bhar
Topoi
Natural Language Processing Techniques
article

Logical Misconceptions, Pragmatic Insufficiencies in LLMs and How to Fix Them

Nicholas Asher, Swarnadeep Bhar
article en

Abstract

Abstract Despite great performance on many tasks, language models (LMs) still struggle with reasoning, sometimes providing responses that cannot possibly be true because they stem from logical incoherence. Extending on the arguments of Asher and Bhar (2024), we show that logical incoherencies follow from an LLM’s computation of its internal representations, in particular from an LLM’s failure to take account of the different roles that different expressions may play in determining content. Linguistics and logicians have shown the importance of the fact that logical operators provide a structure on which to compute content recursively. We extend this view of logical tokens to structure at the discursive level with an eye to improving pragmatic reasoning as well as deductive reasoning. The key in reasoning is that these structures introduce operations over an LM’s latent representations that constrain how they may evolve . We show how LLMs can leverage those structures.

Topoi
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR), Université Toulouse III - Paul Sabatier (FR), Université Fédérale de Toulouse Midi-Pyrénées (FR), Université Toulouse-I-Capitole (FR), Institut de Recherche en Informatique de Toulouse (FR), Université Toulouse - Jean Jaurès (FR), Institut Polytechnique de Bordeaux (FR)
Agence Nationale de la Recherche, Université de Toulouse, Région Occitanie Pyrénées-Méditerranée
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Natural Language Processing Techniques
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Logical Misconceptions, Pragmatic Insufficiencies in LLMs and How to Fix Them — Nicholas Asher, Swarnadeep Bhar · Topoi (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS