Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

THiNK: Can Large Language Models Think-aloud?

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

arxiv 2505.20184 v1 pith:OTFG2SJS submitted 2025-05-26 cs.CL cs.AI

THiNK: Can Large Language Models Think-aloud?

classification cs.CL cs.AI
keywords higher-orderthinkevaluationllmsmodelsreasoningthinkingframework
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Assessing higher-order thinking skills in large language models (LLMs) remains a fundamental challenge, especially in tasks that go beyond surface-level accuracy. In this work, we propose THiNK (Testing Higher-order Notion of Knowledge), a multi-agent, feedback-driven evaluation framework grounded in Bloom's Taxonomy. THiNK frames reasoning assessment as an iterative task of problem generation, critique, and revision, encouraging LLMs to think-aloud through step-by-step reflection and refinement. This enables a systematic evaluation of both lower-order (e.g., remember, understand) and higher-order (e.g., evaluate, create) thinking skills. We apply THiNK to seven state-of-the-art LLMs and perform a detailed cognitive analysis of their outputs. Results reveal that while models reliably perform lower-order categories well, they struggle with applying knowledge in realistic contexts and exhibit limited abstraction. Structured feedback loops significantly improve reasoning performance, particularly in higher-order thinking. Qualitative evaluations further confirm that THiNK-guided outputs better align with domain logic and problem structure. The code of our framework provides a scalable methodology for probing and enhancing LLM reasoning, offering new directions for evaluation grounded in learning science, which is available at our GitHub repository.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Mechanistic Interpretability of Cognitive Complexity in LLMs via Linear Probing using Bloom's Taxonomy

    cs.AI 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0

    Linear probes on LLM residual streams classify Bloom's Taxonomy levels with high accuracy, but the result may reflect prompt lexico-semantic cues rather than a general cognitive-complexity representation.