arXiv:2610.18610v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Dialogue and collaborative assistants repeatedly judge what a partner knows, believes, or intends. Typed decision models offer a potential alternativ...
By Kawai Chung, Chunkit Chan, Yuxuan Liu, Yauwai Yim, Xi Yang, Wenbin Hu, Huihao Jing, Chiu Yeung Tang, Changxuan Fan, Ki Sen Hung, Tsun On Kwok, Haoran Li
arXiv:2603.18007v2 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: The study explores whether current Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit Theory of Mind (ToM) capabilities -- specifically, the ability to inf...
By Anna Babarczy, Andras Lukacs, Peter Vedres, Zeteny Bujka
arXiv:2607. 14109v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Probing the capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) and building robust solutions for Multiple-Choice Question Answering (MCQA) remain central challenges in natural language understanding.
By Inder Preet, Shuxin Lin, Dhaval Patel
arXiv:2609.15972v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: As language models become more capable, long-term collaboration in learning, reasoning, and decision-making calls for a deeper understanding of the p...
By Zixuan Wang, Yufan Zhou, Jinzhou Tang, Xinle Yu, Chengjun Wu, Lyumanshan Ye, Zhaoxiang Feng, Letian Peng, Adyasha Patra, Fan Bai, Enze Ma, Zhengding Hu, Jianyang Gu, Zhao Wang, Yufei Ding, Jingbo Shang, Tianmin Shu, Zhiting Hu, Zhen Wang
DialToM is a Theory of Mind benchmark created from naturalistic human-human dialogues, using a multiple-choice format. It introduces a State-Driven Diagnostic Probe that requires models to predict dialogue trajectories based solely on isolated mental-state profiles, without dialogue context. The evaluation shows that large language models are good at inferring mental states (Literal ToM) but struggle to use them for social forecasting (Functional ToM), while a domain expert scores 100% accuracy, highlighting a clear human‑AI gap.
By Neemesh Yadav, Palakorn Achananuparp, Jing Jiang, Ee-Peng Lim
BASIS is a benchmark that tests large language model agents on their ability to infer users’ mental states, detect belief‑reality mismatches, and use this insight to craft better solutions in interactive settings. The study shows that current models often ignore users’ mental states, leading to poorer outcomes, while explicitly eliciting and incorporating such information improves solution quality. Additional experiments compare BASIS with Chain‑of‑Thought prompting, targeted training, and multi‑agent collaboration to demonstrate the practical benefits of mental‑state awareness.
By Minyuan Ruan, Ziyue Wang, Kaiming Liu, Yunghwei Lai, Peng Li, Yang Liu