Evaluating LLMs' Reasoning Over Ordered Procedural Steps

Adrita Anika, Md Messal Monem Miah
10/25/2025
cs.CLcs.LG

No confident code implementation found for this paper.

Abstract

Reasoning over procedural sequences, where the order of steps directly impacts outcomes, is a critical capability for large language models (LLMs). In this work, we study the task of reconstructing globally ordered sequences from shuffled procedural steps, using a curated dataset of food recipes, a domain where correct sequencing is essential for task success. We evaluate several LLMs under zero-shot and few-shot settings and present a comprehensive evaluation framework that adapts established metrics from ranking and sequence alignment. These include Kendall's Tau, Normalized Longest Common Subsequence (NLCS), and Normalized Edit Distance (NED), which capture complementary aspects of ordering quality. Our analysis shows that model performance declines with increasing sequence length, reflecting the added complexity of longer procedures. We also find that greater step displacement in the input, corresponding to more severe shuffling, leads to further degradation. These findings highlight the limitations of current LLMs in procedural reasoning, especially with longer and more disordered inputs.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. Any repos shown below are weak matches — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{anika2025evaluating,
  title  = {Evaluating LLMs' Reasoning Over Ordered Procedural Steps},
  author = {Adrita Anika and Md Messal Monem Miah},
  year   = {2025},
  eprint = {2511.04688},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2511.04688v2}
}

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/2511.04688.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2511.04688)

Discussion