RuozhiBench: Evaluating LLMs with Logical Fallacies and Misleading Premises

Zenan Zhai, Hao Li, Xudong Han, Zhenxuan Zhang, Yixuan Zhang +2 more
2/18/2025
cs.CL

No official code found. Best implementation: LibrAIResearch/ruozhibench (5 stars, last commit 2025-02-19).

Abstract

Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have shown that they can answer questions requiring complex reasoning. However, their ability to identify and respond to text containing logical fallacies or deliberately misleading premises remains less studied. To address this gap, we introduce RuozhiBench, a bilingual dataset comprising 677 carefully curated questions that contain various forms of deceptive reasoning, meticulously crafted through extensive human effort and expert review. In a comprehensive evaluation of 17 LLMs from 5 Series over RuozhiBench using both open-ended and two-choice formats, we conduct extensive analyses on evaluation protocols and result patterns. Despite their high scores on conventional benchmarks, these models showed limited ability to detect and reason correctly about logical fallacies, with even the best-performing model, Claude-3-haiku, achieving only 62% accuracy compared to the human of more than 90%.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations(1)

50PythonFeb 19, 20251 years ago

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{zhai2025ruozhibench,
  title  = {RuozhiBench: Evaluating LLMs with Logical Fallacies and Misleading Premises},
  author = {Zenan Zhai and Hao Li and Xudong Han and Zhenxuan Zhang and Yixuan Zhang and Timothy Baldwin and Haonan Li},
  year   = {2025},
  eprint = {2502.13125},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.13125v1}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2502.13125.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2502.13125)

Discussion