arXiv:2607. 26845v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Inference-time thinking improves the performance of large language models, but aggregate outcomes do not reveal whether models use available evidence more effectively or seek information that could improve future decisions.
Inference-time thinking improves the performance of large language models, but aggregate outcomes do not reveal whether models use available evidence more effectively or seek information that could improve future decisions. We distinguish these responses by measuring action preference, thinking length, and reported confidence under matched uncertainty.
arXiv:2608. 05224v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models fine-tuned on human behavioural data have emerged as general-purpose cognitive proxies, but the scale this requires, and whether these models process task structure or exploit statistical shortcuts, remain open questions.
arXiv:2603.17839v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Verbal confidence -- prompting LLMs to state their confidence as a number or category -- is widely used to extract uncertainty estimates from...
arXiv:2608. 16707v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as decision-making agents in settings that require sophisticated environmental exploration.
The paper investigates whether input ablations on predictive models can reliably reveal the importance of information for explaining human sequential choice behavior. Using two synthetic bandit tasks with known generating policies, the authors compare GRUs, Transformers, a fine‑tuned LLaMA, and cognitive models under varied reward contributions. They find that while neural models can predict choices well, their responses to ablations often diverge from the true generating process, indicating that predictive accuracy alone does not guarantee faithful model ablations.
arXiv:2603.22161v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Metacognition -- assessing the quality of one's own cognitive performance -- guides adaptive behavior across species. Substantial research demonstr...
arXiv:2605. 24396v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Long chains of thought (CoT) from current language models frequently contain logical gaps and unjustified leaps, limiting the gains from additional test-time compute.
The study evaluates mentalization—the capacity to infer others’ beliefs and intentions—in large language models (LLMs) using two economic games and cognitive computational modeling. Researchers tested 2,099 LLM agents from four model families (DeepSeek, GPT‑4.1, GPT‑5, Gemini 2.0 Flash) against opponents of varying sophistication, comparing their performance to 251 human participants. Results show that LLMs exhibit distinct mentalizing behaviors that vary by model provider and size, with strategic prompting generally enhancing performance; notably, GPT‑5 agents adapt their recursive reasoning depth to match opponent sophistication, outperforming humans in one task.
arXiv:2606. 15877v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Chain-of-thought (CoT) improves large language models' performance in math and symbolic reasoning.
arXiv:2607. 02686v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reinforcement learning agents operating under partial observability must act on incomplete information, making them natural candidates for guidance from small language models (SLMs) that carry broad reasoning priors.
arXiv:2608.01069v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Bandit algorithms generate data for downstream inference, but adaptive sampling biases post-bandit sample means. We analyze this bias for stable in...
arXiv:2608. 09638v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Theory of Mind (ToM) is essential for agent interactions, yet existing evaluations either rely on static scenarios that oversimplify mental-state reasoning or interactive settings that provide limited diagnostic insight.