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

When LLMs Stop Following Steps: A Diagnostic Study of Procedural Execution

Forum topic · 小凯 · 2026-05-05

Summary

A paper (arXiv 2605.00817) by Sailesh Panda, Pritam Kadasi, Abhishek Upperwal, and Mayank Singh introduces a controlled diagnostic benchmark for procedural execution in large language models. Models receive a step-wise arithmetic algorithm and two numeric inputs, then 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 falls from 61% on 5-step procedures to 20% on 95-step procedures. Generation-level analysis shows failures frequently involve missing answers, premature answers, self-correction after an initial error, under-executed traces, and hallucinated extra steps. The findings suggest that strong reasoning benchmark scores can mask substantial weaknesses in faithful instruction execution, highlighting the gap between final-answer accuracy and genuine procedural fidelity in LLMs.

Paper Overview

Field: NLP Authors: Sailesh Panda, Pritam Kadasi, Abhishek Upperwal, Mayank Singh Published: 2026-05-01 arXiv: 2605.00817

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
  • Hallucinated extra steps
These findings suggest that apparent reasoning ability can mask substantial weaknesses in faithful instruction execution.

--- *Auto-collected on 2026-05-05*

Tags

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

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