Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41594986›Full record

ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Assessing the Relational Abilities of Large Language Models and Large Reasoning Models.

Matthias Raemaekers, Martin Finn, Jan De Houwer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Matthias RaemaekersDepartment of Experimental Clinical and Health Psychology, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-4584-1095
Martin FinnDepartment of Experimental Clinical and Health Psychology, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-5035-9797
Jan De HouwerDepartment of Experimental Clinical and Health Psychology, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-0488-5224

Funding

Bijzonder Onderzoeksfonds - Special Research Fund BOF22/MET_V/002 - 01M00209Research Foundation - Flanders 11M0325NResearch Foundation - Flanders 12A2B26N
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We assessed the relational abilities of two state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) and two large reasoning models (LRMs) using a new battery of several thousand syllogistic problems, similar to those used in behavior-analytic tasks for relational abilities. To probe the models' general (as opposed to task- or domain-specific) abilities, the problems involved multiple relations (sameness, difference, comparison, hierarchy, analogy, temporal and deictic), specified between randomly selected nonwords and varied in terms of complexity (number of premises, inclusion of irrelevant premises) and format (valid or invalid conclusion prompted). We also tested transformations of stimulus function. Our results show that the models generally performed well in this new task battery. The models did show some variability across different relations and were to a limited extent affected by task variations. Model performance was, however, robust against the randomization of premise order in a replication study. Our research provides a new framework for testing a core aspect of intellectual (i.e., relational) abilities in artificial systems; we discuss the implications of this and future research directions.

Indexed as

large language modelsreasoning modelsrelational abilities indexrelational reasoningtransformation of function

Identifiers

PMID41594986
PMCPMC12837307

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.