Abstract
We investigate the logical reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) and their scalability across complex deductive tasks. Using ZebraLogic, a newly developed benchmark dataset of logic grid puzzles derived from constraint satisfaction problems (CSPs), we systematically evaluate LLM performance. ZebraLogic spans a broad range of search space complexities and incorporates diverse logical constraints, providing a controlled environment to assess reasoning abilities. Our results reveal a significant decline in accuracy as problem complexity increases—a phenomenon we term the “curse of complexity.” Notably, this limitation persists even with scaling model size and inference-time computation, suggesting fundamental constraints in current LLM reasoning capabilities. Additionally, we explore strategies such as Best-of-N sampling, backtracking mechanisms, and self-verification prompts to enhance logical reasoning performance. Our findings provide critical insights into the scaling behavior of LLMs, highlight their limitations, and outline potential directions for advancing their reasoning capabilities.