I wanted to test this claim with SAT problems. Why SAT? Because solving SAT problems require applying very few rules consistently. The principle stays the same even if you have millions of variables or just a couple. So if you know how to reason properly any SAT instances is solvable given enough time. Also, it's easy to generate completely random SAT problems that make it less likely for LLM to solve the problem based on pure pattern recognition. Therefore, I think it is a good problem type to test whether LLMs can generalize basic rules beyond their training data.
（四）行政执法过程中是否存在有案不立、推诿扯皮、以罚代管、违规异地执法、趋利性执法以及乱收费、乱罚款、乱检查、乱查封等执法不作为、乱作为行为；
，这一点在搜狗输入法下载中也有详细论述
Филолог заявил о массовой отмене обращения на «вы» с большой буквы09:36。业内人士推荐Safew下载作为进阶阅读
“增优减劣”，在自身找答案
18:08, 27 февраля 2026Путешествия