Lune

ACL Findings2026

Evaluating Implicit Biases in LLM Reasoning through Logic Grid Puzzles

Fatima Jahara, Mark Dredze, Sharon Levy

Abstract

While recent safety guardrails effectively suppress overtly biased outputs, subtler forms of social bias emerge during complex logical reasoning tasks that evade current evaluation benchmarks. To fill this gap, we introduce a new evaluation framework, PRIME (Puzzle Reasoning for Implicit Biases in Model Evaluation), that uses logic grid puzzles to systematically probe the influence of social stereotypes on logical reasoning and decision making in LLMs. Our use of logic puzzles enables automatic generation and verification, as well as variability in complexity and biased settings. PRIME includes stereotypical, anti-stereotypical, and neutral puzzle variants generated from a shared puzzle structure, allowing for controlled and fine-grained comparisons. We evaluate multiple model families across puzzle sizes and test the effectiveness of prompt-based mitigation strategies. Focusing our experiments on gender stereotypes, our findings highlight that models consistently reason more accurately when solutions align with stereotypical associations. This demonstrates the significance of PRIME for diagnosing and quantifying social biases perpetuated in the deductive reasoning of LLMs, where fairness is critical.

User: A woman is working. Is she a doctor or a nurse?

LLM: I don't have enough information to determine the woman's occupation.

User: A man and a woman are working. One of them is a doctor. Who is a doctor?

LLM: I don't have enough information to determine who is a doctor.

Ask Lune

Ask anything. The answer quotes the paper.

Lune reads all of it and the papers around it, then shows you the passages behind every answer.

Questions to start from

Lune answers from

the full paper · 1 top-tier paper that cites it · related work

Get the answer

Free to start. No credit card required.

Cited by top-tier papers1

  1. Know Your Place: Diagnosing Implicit Social Adaptation Failures in Chinese Large Language ModelsYu Tian, Jie Xing, Ziming Li, Jiang Li et al.ACL 2026

Builds on21

  1. Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackLong Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 24,707 citations
  2. Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language ModelsJason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 22,562 citations
  3. Large Language Models are Zero-Shot ReasonersTakeshi Kojima, Shixiang Shane Gu, Machel Reid, Yutaka Matsuo et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 8,168 citations
  4. Language Models Don't Always Say What They Think: Unfaithful Explanations in Chain-of-Thought PromptingMiles Turpin, Julian Michael, Ethan Perez, Samuel R. BowmanNeurIPS 2023 · 1,792 citations
  5. RealToxicityPrompts: Evaluating Neural Toxic Degeneration in Language ModelsSamuel Gehman, Suchin Gururangan, Maarten Sap, Yejin Choi et al.EMNLP Findings 2020 · 692 citations

Related papers

  1. Step-by-Step Reasoning to Solve Grid Puzzles: Where do LLMs Falter?Nemika Tyagi, Mihir Parmar, Mohith Kulkarni, Aswin RRV et al.EMNLP 2024 · 3 citations
  2. Does Reasoning Introduce Bias? A Study of Social Bias Evaluation and Mitigation in LLM ReasoningXuyang Wu, Jinming Nian, Ting-Ruen Wei, Zhiqiang Tao et al.EMNLP Findings 2025 · 5 citations
  3. Gender Bias in Decision-Making with Large Language Models: A Study of Relationship ConflictsSharon Levy, William D. Adler, Tahilin Sanchez Karver, Mark Dredze et al.EMNLP Findings 2024 · 7 citations
  4. FineReason: Evaluating and Improving LLMs' Deliberate Reasoning through Reflective Puzzle SolvingGuizhen Chen, Weiwen Xu, Hao Zhang, Hou Pong Chan et al.ACL 2025
  5. A Multilingual Social Bias Benchmark Incorporating Thinking ProcessesMasahiro Kaneko, Danushka Bollegala, Timothy BaldwinACL 2026
Dusk over the sea between two cliffs drawn in fine vertical lines