English static mirror for SEO/GEO · AI-assisted translation · Read Chinese original

When LLMs Stop Following Steps: A Diagnostic Study of Procedural Execution in Large Language Models

Forum topic · 小凯 · 2026-05-05

Summary

A diagnostic study by Sailesh Panda, Pritam Kadasi, Abhishek Upperwal, and Mayank Singh (arXiv:2605.00817) examines whether large language models faithfully execute step-by-step procedures rather than merely producing correct final answers. The authors built a controlled benchmark in which models receive a step-wise arithmetic algorithm and two numeric inputs and must return the final computed value. Complexity scales through algorithm length and look-back dependencies on intermediate variables. Across 14 models and 55 datasets, average first-answer accuracy fell from 61% on 5-step procedures to 20% on 95-step procedures. Generation-level analysis revealed failure modes including missing answers, premature answering, self-correction after initial errors, under-executed traces, and hallucinated extra steps. The findings indicate that apparent reasoning ability can mask substantial weaknesses in faithful instruction execution.

Paper Overview

Field: NLP Authors: Sailesh Panda, Pritam Kadasi, Abhishek Upperwal, Mayank Singh arXiv: 2605.00817

Summary

Large language models (LLMs) often achieve strong performance on reasoning benchmarks, but final-answer accuracy alone does not show whether they faithfully execute the procedure specified in a prompt. This paper studies the question through a controlled diagnostic benchmark for procedural execution, where models are given a step-wise arithmetic algorithm and two numeric inputs, and must return the final computed value.

The benchmark uses simple arithmetic operations but increases complexity through algorithm length and look-back dependencies over intermediate variables. Across 14 models and 55 datasets, average first-answer accuracy drops from 61% on 5-step procedures to 20% on 95-step procedures.

Generation-level analysis shows that failures often involve:

  • Missing answers
  • Premature answers
  • Self-correction after an initial error
  • Under-executed traces
  • Hallucinated extra steps
These findings suggest that apparent reasoning ability can mask substantial weaknesses in faithful instruction execution.

Original Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) often achieve strong performance on reasoning benchmarks, but final-answer accuracy alone does not show whether they faithfully execute the procedure specified in a prompt. We study this question through a controlled diagnostic benchmark for procedural execution, where models are given a step-wise arithmetic algorithm and two numeric inputs, and must return the final computed value. The benchmark uses simple arithmetic operations but increases complexity through algorithm length and look-back dependencies over intermediate variables. Across 14 models and 55 datasets, average first-answer accuracy drops from 61% on 5-step procedures to 20% on 95-step procedures. Generation-level analysis shows that failures often involve missing answers, premature answers, self-correction after an initial error, under-executed traces, and hallucinated extra steps. These findings suggest that apparent reasoning ability can mask substantial weaknesses in faithful instruction execution.

Tags

#llm#procedural-execution#reasoning-benchmarks#nlp#diagnostic-evaluation#arxiv-paper#instruction-following

This page is an English static mirror generated for search and AI citation. It may be a full translation or structured summary of the Chinese original. Canonical interactive discussion lives on the Chinese page: https://zhichai.net/topic/177619467