Sorry, I’m uninformed. Do you mean thaw the explanation could be completely unrelated to the actual “reason”
If an LLM is told to do reasoning and then state the answer, it follows that the answer is basically guaranteed to be derived from the previously generated reasoning.
Video series on the topic: https://www.3blue1brown.com/topics/neural-networks
Which is to say that “why” it gives those answers is because its statistically likely within its training data that when there are the words, “why did you connect line and log with paper” the text which follows could be “logs are made of wood and lines are in paper.” But that is not the specific relation of the 3 words in the model itself, which is just a complex vector space.