SocialMaze is a new benchmark designed to evaluate large language models on social reasoning tasks that involve deep reasoning, dynamic interaction, and information uncertainty. It comprises six tasks drawn from social deduction games, everyday interactions, and digital communities, and includes automated checks and human validation to ensure data quality. Experiments with twelve LLMs reveal that stronger chain‑of‑thought reasoning improves performance on deeper inference tasks, while uncertainty consistently hurts results; targeted fine‑tuning on curated reasoning traces can markedly enhance structured social‑reasoning abilities.
By Zixiang Xu, Yanbo Wang, Yue Huang, Haomin Zhuang, Yujun Zhou, Jiayi Ye, Sixian Li, Zirui Song, Lang Gao, Chenxi Wang, Zhaorun Chen, Wang Pan, Yue Zhao, Jieyu Zhao, Xiangliang Zhang, Xiuying Chen
arXiv:2510.15144v4 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Simulating human reasoning in open-ended tasks has long been a central aspiration in AI and cognitive science. While large language models now appr...
By Chance Jiajie Li, Zhenze Mo, Yuhan Tang, Ao Qu, Jiayi Wu, Kaiya Ivy Zhao, Yulu Gan, Jie Fan, Jiangbo Yu, Hang Jiang, Paul Pu Liang, Jinhua Zhao, Luis Alberto Alonso Pastor, Kent Larson
arXiv:2509. 14704v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Benchmark saturation and training-data contamination increasingly obscure whether reported gains in large language models (LLMs) reflect genuine advances in reasoning or familiarity with recurring patterns in benchmark problems.
By Masaharu Mizumoto, Dat Nguyen, Zhiheng Han, Xingfu Li, Yo Nakawake, Le Minh Nguyen
arXiv:2606. 14199v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models are increasingly deployed as human simulators for interactive evaluation and social simulation.
By Xuhui Zhou, Weiwei Sun, Weihua Du, Jiarui Liu, Haojia Sun, Qianou Ma, Tongshuang Wu, Yiming Yang, Maarten Sap
arXiv:2510. 00492v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The reliability of large language models (LLMs) during test-time scaling is often assessed with \emph{external verifiers} or \emph{reward models} that distinguish correct reasoning from flawed logic.
By Dong Bok Lee, Seanie Lee, Sangwoo Park, Minki Kang, Jinheon Baek, Dongki Kim, Dominik Wagner, Jiongdao Jin, Heejun Lee, Tobias Bocklet, Jinyu Wang, Jingjing Fu, Sung Ju Hwang, Jiang Bian, Lei Song
arXiv:2605. 28969v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: If an AI agent makes decisions on a person's behalf, those decisions must align with its user.
By Aarik Gulaya
The paper introduces the Grounded Integration Measure (GIM), a benchmark of 820 expert‑authored problems designed to test models on tasks that integrate multiple cognitive operations such as constraint satisfaction, state tracking, epistemic vigilance, and audience calibration. GIM emphasizes realistic, broadly accessible knowledge rather than specialized expertise, and uses a judge‑aware 2‑parameter logistic IRT model to produce robust ability estimates across 53 model‑thinking‑level configurations. The authors provide a comprehensive leaderboard of 22 models and 47 test configurations, and conduct an extensive study on how test‑time compute affects model capability, finding that configuration choices like thinking budget and quantization can be as influential as model selection itself.
whyItMatters":"By focusing on integration of multiple cognitive domains, GIM offers a more realistic assessment of model reasoning capabilities than benchmarks that either overemphasize memorization or abstract reasoning alone."
By Rohit Patel, Alexandre Rezende, Steven McClain
InternBootcamp is an open‑source framework that offers over 1,000 domain‑diverse task environments for large language model (LLM) reasoning research. It introduces Bootcamp‑Eval, an automatically generated benchmark for comprehensive performance assessment. Experiments show that training on InternBootcamp significantly improves reasoning performance, with a 32B model achieving state‑of‑the‑art results on Bootcamp‑Eval and other established benchmarks, demonstrating that scaling the number of training tasks yields consistent gains.
By Peiji Li, Jiasheng Ye, Yongkang Chen, Linyang Li, Yichuan Ma, Zijie Yu, Ganqu Cui, Haozhan Li, Jiacheng Chen, Chengqi Lyu, Wenwei Zhang, Qipeng Guo, Dahua Lin, Bowen Zhou, Kai Chen
arXiv:2606. 26671v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Post-training alignment determines the reasoning and human preference following capabilities of large language models, yet most existing works withhold detailed data construction, filtering rules and training recipes, which hinders community reproducibility and lightweight model optimization.
By Qiaobo Hao, Yangqian Wu, Shunyi Wang, Zhongjian Zhang, Ziqun Li, Yayin He, Muqing Li, Chen Zhong
arXiv:2604. 27960v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Recent large language models (LLMs) have achieved impressive reasoning milestones but continue to struggle with high computational costs, logical inconsistencies, and sharp performance degradation on high-complexity problems.
By Adam Ishay, Joohyung Lee
arXiv:2606. 06546v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Evaluating large language models (LLMs) for education requires measuring how models teach, not only what they know.
By Tao Liu, Ye Lu, Ruohua Zhang, Siyu Song, Wentao Liu, Aimin Zhou, Hao Hao
arXiv:2510. 18428v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Optimization modeling underlies critical decision-making across industries, yet remains difficult to automate: natural-language problem descriptions must be translated into precise mathematical formulations and executable solver code.
By Minwei Kong, Ao Qu, Xiaotong Guo, Wenbin Ouyang, Chonghe Jiang, Han Zheng, Yining Ma, Dingyi Zhuang, Yuhan Tang, Junyi Li, Shenhao Wang, Haris Koutsopoulos, Hai Wang, Cathy Wu, Jinhua Zhao