Do LLMs Exhibit Human-Like Reasoning? Evaluating Theory of Mind in LLMs for Open-Ended Responses

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2406.05659v1
• Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2024 05:57:59 GMT
• Title: Do LLMs Exhibit Human-Like Reasoning? Evaluating Theory of Mind in LLMs for Open-Ended Responses
• Authors: Maryam Amirizaniani, Elias Martin, Maryna Sivachenko, Afra Mashhadi, Chirag Shah,
• Abstract summary: Theory of Mind (ToM) reasoning entails recognizing that other individuals possess their own intentions, emotions, and thoughts. Large language models (LLMs) excel in tasks such as summarization, question answering, and translation. Despite advancements, the extent to which LLMs truly understand ToM reasoning remains inadequately explored in open-ended scenarios.
• Score: 11.121931601655174
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Theory of Mind (ToM) reasoning entails recognizing that other individuals possess their own intentions, emotions, and thoughts, which is vital for guiding one's own thought processes. Although large language models (LLMs) excel in tasks such as summarization, question answering, and translation, they still face challenges with ToM reasoning, especially in open-ended questions. Despite advancements, the extent to which LLMs truly understand ToM reasoning and how closely it aligns with human ToM reasoning remains inadequately explored in open-ended scenarios. Motivated by this gap, we assess the abilities of LLMs to perceive and integrate human intentions and emotions into their ToM reasoning processes within open-ended questions. Our study utilizes posts from Reddit's ChangeMyView platform, which demands nuanced social reasoning to craft persuasive responses. Our analysis, comparing semantic similarity and lexical overlap metrics between responses generated by humans and LLMs, reveals clear disparities in ToM reasoning capabilities in open-ended questions, with even the most advanced models showing notable limitations. To enhance LLM capabilities, we implement a prompt tuning method that incorporates human intentions and emotions, resulting in improvements in ToM reasoning performance. However, despite these improvements, the enhancement still falls short of fully achieving human-like reasoning. This research highlights the deficiencies in LLMs' social reasoning and demonstrates how integrating human intentions and emotions can boost their effectiveness.

Related papers

• Perceptions to Beliefs: Exploring Precursory Inferences for Theory of Mind in Large Language Models [51.91448005607405]
  We evaluate key human ToM precursors by annotating characters' perceptions on ToMi and FANToM. We present PercepToM, a novel ToM method leveraging LLMs' strong perception inference capability while supplementing their limited perception-to-belief inference.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-08T14:58:29Z)
• Through the Theory of Mind's Eye: Reading Minds with Multimodal Video Large Language Models [52.894048516550065]
  We develop a pipeline for multimodal ToM reasoning using video and text. We also enable explicit ToM reasoning by retrieving key frames for answering a ToM question.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-19T18:24:31Z)
• LLM Theory of Mind and Alignment: Opportunities and Risks [0.0]
  There is growing interest in whether large language models (LLMs) have theory of mind (ToM) This paper identifies key areas in which LLM ToM will show up in human:LLM interactions at individual and group levels. It lays out a broad spectrum of potential implications and suggests the most pressing areas for future research.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-13T19:52:16Z)
• Mind's Eye of LLMs: Visualization-of-Thought Elicits Spatial Reasoning in Large Language Models [71.93366651585275]
  Large language models (LLMs) have exhibited impressive performance in language comprehension and various reasoning tasks. We propose Visualization-of-Thought (VoT) to elicit spatial reasoning of LLMs by visualizing their reasoning traces. VoT significantly enhances the spatial reasoning abilities of LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-04T17:45:08Z)
• Should We Fear Large Language Models? A Structural Analysis of the Human Reasoning System for Elucidating LLM Capabilities and Risks Through the Lens of Heidegger's Philosophy [0.0]
  This study investigates the capabilities and risks of Large Language Models (LLMs) It uses the innovative parallels between the statistical patterns of word relationships within LLMs and Martin Heidegger's concepts of "ready-to-hand" and "present-at-hand" Our findings reveal that while LLMs possess the capability for Direct Explicative Reasoning and Pseudo Rational Reasoning, they fall short in authentic rational reasoning and have no creative reasoning capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-05T19:40:53Z)
• ToMBench: Benchmarking Theory of Mind in Large Language Models [42.80231362967291]
  ToM is the cognitive capability to perceive and ascribe mental states to oneself and others. Existing ToM evaluations are hindered by challenges such as constrained scope, subjective judgment, and unintended contamination. We introduce ToMBench with three key characteristics: a systematic evaluation framework encompassing 8 tasks and 31 abilities in social cognition, a multiple-choice question format to support automated and unbiased evaluation, and a build-from-scratch bilingual inventory to strictly avoid data leakage.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-23T02:05:46Z)
• Think Twice: Perspective-Taking Improves Large Language Models' Theory-of-Mind Capabilities [63.90227161974381]
  SimToM is a novel prompting framework inspired by Simulation Theory's notion of perspective-taking. Our approach, which requires no additional training and minimal prompt-tuning, shows substantial improvement over existing methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T22:49:27Z)
• Encouraging Divergent Thinking in Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Debate [85.3444184685235]
  We propose a Multi-Agent Debate (MAD) framework, in which multiple agents express their arguments in the state of "tit for tat" and a judge manages the debate process to obtain a final solution. Our framework encourages divergent thinking in LLMs which would be helpful for tasks that require deep levels of contemplation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-30T15:25:45Z)
• Large Language Models are In-Context Semantic Reasoners rather than Symbolic Reasoners [75.85554779782048]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have excited the natural language and machine learning community over recent years. Despite of numerous successful applications, the underlying mechanism of such in-context capabilities still remains unclear. In this work, we hypothesize that the learned textitsemantics of language tokens do the most heavy lifting during the reasoning process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-24T07:33:34Z)
• Are LLMs the Master of All Trades? : Exploring Domain-Agnostic Reasoning Skills of LLMs [0.0]
  This study aims to investigate the performance of large language models (LLMs) on different reasoning tasks. My findings indicate that LLMs excel at analogical and moral reasoning, yet struggle to perform as proficiently on spatial reasoning tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-22T22:53:44Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.