The existing methods for evaluating the inference abilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) have been predominantly results-centric, making it challenging to assess the inference process comprehensively. We introduce a novel approach using the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (ARC) benchmark to evaluate the inference and contextual understanding abilities of LLMs in a process-centric manner, focusing on three key components from the Language of Thought Hypothesis (LoTH): Logical Coherence, Compositionality, and Productivity. Our carefully designed experiments reveal that while LLMs demonstrate some inference capabilities, they still significantly lag behind human-level reasoning in these three aspects. The main contribution of this article lies in introducing the LoTH perspective, which provides a method for evaluating the reasoning process that conventional results-oriented approaches fail to capture, thereby offering new insights into the development of human-level reasoning in artificial intelligence systems.

The task of assigning internationally accepted commodity codes (aka HS codes) to traded goods is a critical function of customs offices. Like court decisions made by judges, this task follows the doctrine of precedent and can be nontrivial even for experienced officers. Together with the Korea Customs Service (KCS), we propose a first-ever explainable decision supporting model that suggests the most likely subheadings (i.e., the first six digits) of the HS code. The model also provides reasoning for its suggestion in the form of a document that is interpretable by customs officers. We evaluated the model using 5,000 cases that recently received a classification request. The results showed that the top-3 suggestions made by our model had an accuracy of 93.9% when classifying 925 challenging subheadings. A user study with 32 customs experts further confirmed that our algorithmic suggestions accompanied by explainable reasonings, can substantially reduce the time and effort taken by customs officers for classification reviews.

The existing methods for evaluating the inference abilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) have been predominantly results-centric, making it challenging to assess the inference process comprehensively. We introduce a novel approach using the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (ARC) benchmark to evaluate the inference and contextual understanding abilities of LLMs in a process-centric manner, focusing on three key components from the Language of Thought Hypothesis (LoTH): Logical Coherence, Compositionality, and Productivity. Our carefully designed experiments reveal that while LLMs demonstrate some inference capabilities, they still significantly lag behind human-level reasoning in these three aspects. The main contribution of this article lies in introducing the LoTH perspective, which provides a method for evaluating the reasoning process that conventional results-oriented approaches fail to capture, thereby offering new insights into the development of human-level reasoning in artificial intelligence systems.

The task of assigning internationally accepted commodity codes (aka HS codes) to traded goods is a critical function of customs offices. Like court decisions made by judges, this task follows the doctrine of precedent and can be nontrivial even for experienced officers. Together with the Korea Customs Service (KCS), we propose a first-ever explainable decision supporting model that suggests the most likely subheadings (i.e., the first six digits) of the HS code. The model also provides reasoning for its suggestion in the form of a document that is interpretable by customs officers. We evaluated the model using 5,000 cases that recently received a classification request. The results showed that the top-3 suggestions made by our model had an accuracy of 93.9% when classifying 925 challenging subheadings. A user study with 32 customs experts further confirmed that our algorithmic suggestions accompanied by explainable reasonings, can substantially reduce the time and effort taken by customs officers for classification reviews.

We study the human-in-the-loop customs inspection scenario, where an AI-assisted algorithm supports customs officers by recommending a set of imported goods to be inspected. If the inspected items are fraudulent, the officers can levy extra duties. These logs are then used as additional training data for the next iterations. Choosing to inspect suspicious items first leads to an immediate gain in customs revenue, yet such inspections may not bring new insights for learning dynamic traffic patterns. On the other hand, inspecting uncertain items can help acquire new knowledge, which will be used as a supplementary training resource to update the selection systems. Based on multiyear customs datasets from three countries, we demonstrate that some degree of exploration is necessary to cope with domain shifts in the trade data. The results show that a hybrid strategy of selecting likely fraudulent and uncertain items will eventually outperform the exploitation-only strategy.

We present ARCTraj, a dataset and methodological framework for modeling human reasoning through complex visual tasks in the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (ARC). While ARC has inspired extensive research on abstract reasoning, most existing approaches rely on static input-output supervision, which limits insight into how reasoning unfolds over time. ARCTraj addresses this gap by recording temporally ordered, object-level actions that capture how humans iteratively transform inputs into outputs, revealing intermediate reasoning steps that conventional datasets overlook. Collected via the O2ARC web interface, it contains around 10,000 trajectories annotated with task identifiers, timestamps, and success labels across 400 training tasks from the ARC-AGI-1 benchmark. It further defines a unified reasoning pipeline encompassing data collection, action abstraction, Markov decision process (MDP) formulation, and downstream learning, enabling integration with reinforcement learning, generative modeling, and sequence modeling methods such as PPO, World Models, GFlowNets, Diffusion agents, and Decision Transformers. Analyses of spatial selection, color attribution, and strategic convergence highlight the structure and diversity of human reasoning. Together, these contributions position ARCTraj as a structured and interpretable foundation for studying human-like reasoning, advancing explainability, alignment, and generalizable intelligence.

Designing effective task sequences is crucial for curriculum reinforcement learning (CRL), where agents must gradually acquire skills by training on intermediate tasks. A key challenge in CRL is to identify tasks that promote exploration, yet are similar enough to support effective transfer. While recent approach suggests comparing tasks via their Structural Causal Models (SCMs), the method requires access to ground-truth causal structures, an unrealistic assumption in most RL settings. In this work, we propose Causal-Paced Deep Reinforcement Learning (CP-DRL), a curriculum learning framework aware of SCM differences between tasks based on interaction data approximation. This signal captures task novelty, which we combine with the agent's learnability, measured by reward gain, to form a unified objective. Empirically, CP-DRL outperforms existing curriculum methods on the Point Mass benchmark, achieving faster convergence and higher returns. CP-DRL demonstrates reduced variance with comparable final returns in the Bipedal Walker-Trivial setting, and achieves the highest average performance in the Infeasible variant. These results indicate that leveraging causal relationships between tasks can improve the structure-awareness and sample efficiency of curriculum reinforcement learning. We provide the full implementation of CP-DRL to facilitate the reproduction of our main results at https://github.com/Cho-Geonwoo/CP-DRL.

Generalizing deep reinforcement learning agents to unseen environments remains a significant challenge. One promising solution is Unsupervised Environment Design (UED), a co-evolutionary framework in which a teacher adaptively generates tasks with high learning potential, while a student learns a robust policy from this evolving curriculum. Existing UED methods typically measure learning potential via regret, the gap between optimal and current performance, approximated solely by value-function loss. Building on these approaches, we introduce the transition-prediction error as an additional term in our regret approximation. To capture how training on one task affects performance on others, we further propose a lightweight metric called Co-Learnability. By combining these two measures, we present Transition-aware Regret Approximation with Co-learnability for Environment Design (TRACED). Empirical evaluations show that TRACED produces curricula that improve zero-shot generalization over strong baselines across multiple benchmarks. Ablation studies confirm that the transition-prediction error drives rapid complexity ramp-up and that Co-Learnability delivers additional gains when paired with the transition-prediction error. These results demonstrate how refined regret approximation and explicit modeling of task relationships can be leveraged for sample-efficient curriculum design in UED. Project Page: https://geonwoo.me/traced/

The Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (ARC) poses a stringent test of general AI capabilities, requiring solvers to infer abstract patterns from only a handful of examples. Despite substantial progress in deep learning, state-of-the-art models still achieve accuracy rates of merely 40-55% on 2024 ARC Competition, indicative of a significant gap between their performance and human-level reasoning. In this work, we seek to bridge that gap by introducing an analogy-inspired ARC dataset, GIFARC. Leveraging large language models (LLMs) and vision-language models (VLMs), we synthesize new ARC-style tasks from a variety of GIF images that include analogies. Each new task is paired with ground-truth analogy, providing an explicit mapping between visual transformations and everyday concepts. By embedding robust human-intuitive analogies into ARC-style tasks, GIFARC guides AI agents to evaluate the task analogically before engaging in brute-force pattern search, thus efficiently reducing problem complexity and build a more concise and human-understandable solution. We empirically validate that guiding LLM with analogic approach with GIFARC affects task-solving approaches of LLMs to align with analogic approach of human.

This paper demonstrates that model-based reinforcement learning (model-based RL) is a suitable approach for the task of analogical reasoning. We hypothesize that model-based RL can solve analogical reasoning tasks more efficiently through the creation of internal models. To test this, we compared DreamerV3, a model-based RL method, with Proximal Policy Optimization, a model-free RL method, on the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (ARC) tasks. Our results indicate that model-based RL not only outperforms model-free RL in learning and generalizing from single tasks but also shows significant advantages in reasoning across similar tasks.