REVIEW 6 cited by
How FaR Are Large Language Models From Agents with Theory-of-Mind?
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
"Thinking is for Doing." Humans can infer other people's mental states from observations--an ability called Theory-of-Mind (ToM)--and subsequently act pragmatically on those inferences. Existing question answering benchmarks such as ToMi ask models questions to make inferences about beliefs of characters in a story, but do not test whether models can then use these inferences to guide their actions. We propose a new evaluation paradigm for large language models (LLMs): Thinking for Doing (T4D), which requires models to connect inferences about others' mental states to actions in social scenarios. Experiments on T4D demonstrate that LLMs such as GPT-4 and PaLM 2 seemingly excel at tracking characters' beliefs in stories, but they struggle to translate this capability into strategic action. Our analysis reveals the core challenge for LLMs lies in identifying the implicit inferences about mental states without being explicitly asked about as in ToMi, that lead to choosing the correct action in T4D. To bridge this gap, we introduce a zero-shot prompting framework, Foresee and Reflect (FaR), which provides a reasoning structure that encourages LLMs to anticipate future challenges and reason about potential actions. FaR boosts GPT-4's performance from 50% to 71% on T4D, outperforming other prompting methods such as Chain-of-Thought and Self-Ask. Moreover, FaR generalizes to diverse out-of-distribution story structures and scenarios that also require ToM inferences to choose an action, consistently outperforming other methods including few-shot in-context learning.
Forward citations
Cited by 6 Pith papers
-
Training with (Swap) Regret Loss in a Single-Layer Self-Attention Model: A Case Study on the Probability Simplex
Training single-layer attention with squared regret loss has stationary points that implement smoothed fictitious play (external regret) and, via a new swap-regret loss, the Blum–Mansour no-swap-regret algorithm.
-
From Black Boxes to Transparent Minds: Evaluating and Enhancing the Theory of Mind in Multimodal Large Language Models
Attention heads in multimodal LLMs linearly encode agents' beliefs, and steering those heads along probe-derived directions improves first- and second-order belief accuracy on the new GridToM benchmark.
-
Where You Go is Who You Are: Behavioral Theory-Guided LLMs for Inverse Reinforcement Learning
SILIC uses LLM-guided inverse reinforcement learning and Theory of Planned Behavior chain reasoning to infer age, gender, income, and employment from travel trajectories, reportedly beating SVM, XGBoost, CatBoost, and...
-
Effects of structure on reasoning in instance-level Self-Discover
Unstructured natural-language reasoning plans outperform dynamically generated JSON reasoning plans in an instance-level Self-Discover framework, with relative gains up to 18.90% on MATH.
-
Towards Machine Theory of Mind with Large Language Model-Augmented Inverse Planning
An LLM-augmented Bayesian inverse planning model, LAIP, generates hypotheses and action likelihoods, then uses Bayes' rule to infer agent preferences, outperforming LLM-only baselines.
-
Multi-Agent Language Models: Advancing Cooperation, Coordination, and Adaptation
A thesis proposal repurposing two prior papers on LM agents for text games, framed as a path to theory-of-mind AI, with no new theory-of-mind evidence.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.