@inproceedings{tai-van-2025-llmsr,
    title = "{LLMSR}@{XLLM}25: Integrating Reasoning Prompt Strategies with Structural Prompt Formats for Enhanced Logical Inference",
    author = "Tai, Le  and
      Van, Thin",
    editor = "Fei, Hao  and
      Tu, Kewei  and
      Zhang, Yuhui  and
      Hu, Xiang  and
      Han, Wenjuan  and
      Jia, Zixia  and
      Zheng, Zilong  and
      Cao, Yixin  and
      Zhang, Meishan  and
      Lu, Wei  and
      Siddharth, N.  and
      {\O}vrelid, Lilja  and
      Xue, Nianwen  and
      Zhang, Yue",
    booktitle = "Proceedings of the 1st Joint Workshop on Large Language Models and Structure Modeling (XLLM 2025)",
    month = aug,
    year = "2025",
    address = "Vienna, Austria",
    publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
    url = "https://preview.aclanthology.org/landing_page/2025.xllm-1.27/",
    pages = "310--316",
    ISBN = "979-8-89176-286-2",
    abstract = "This paper illustrates our NBTailee team sys- tem approach in XLLM-ACL 2025 Task-III: LLM for Structural Reasoning (LLM-SR), aim- ing to solve both Task: Question parsing and CoT parsing. The process of extracting state- ments and evidence is similar to Discourse Pars- ing. Correct extraction of statements or evi- dence from the COT is crucial at the outset. Next, the pairwise relationship between a spe- cific statement and its corresponding evidence is assessed (a statement should be followed by its related evidence from the CoT). Both seman- tic and lexical similarity are used to evaluate the accuracy of statements and evidence predic- tions. Finally, once a statement-evidence pair is correctly extracted, it is evaluated to deter- mine whether the evidence can logically deduce the statement. To tackle Question Parsing and CoT Parsing, we implement and investigate var- ious solutions, including (1) applying different structural prompt formats like JSON, Mark- down, or XML. (2) utilising various prompt techniques: Few-shot, Chain of thought, and Multi-hop prompting. (3) Taking advantage of Natural Language Inference (NLI) model for the Statement Verification step. Our best of- ficial result is a 243.047 mean score for test phases A and B, and finally, we rank 7th on the final leaderboard."
}