Who Sees What? Structured Thought-Action Sequences for Epistemic Reasoning in LLMs

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.14564v1
• Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2025 09:36:53 GMT
• Title: Who Sees What? Structured Thought-Action Sequences for Epistemic Reasoning in LLMs
• Authors: Luca Annese, Sabrina Patania, Silvia Serino, Tom Foulsham, Silvia Rossi, Azzurra Ruggeri, Dimitri Ognibene,
• Abstract summary: This study investigates the potential of structured examples to improve the performance of LLM-based agents within a ReAct framework.<n>We propose a structured solution-processing pipeline that generates three categories of examples: optimal goal paths (G-type), informative node paths (E-type) and step-by-step optimal decision sequences contrasting alternative actions (L-type)<n>While L-type examples slightly reduce clarification requests and overall action steps, they do not yield consistent improvements.
• Score: 1.090218572228214
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) and reasoning frameworks have opened new possibilities for improving the perspective -taking capabilities of autonomous agents. However, tasks that involve active perception, collaborative reasoning, and perspective taking (understanding what another agent can see or knows) pose persistent challenges for current LLM-based systems. This study investigates the potential of structured examples derived from transformed solution graphs generated by the Fast Downward planner to improve the performance of LLM-based agents within a ReAct framework. We propose a structured solution-processing pipeline that generates three distinct categories of examples: optimal goal paths (G-type), informative node paths (E-type), and step-by-step optimal decision sequences contrasting alternative actions (L-type). These solutions are further converted into ``thought-action'' examples by prompting an LLM to explicitly articulate the reasoning behind each decision. While L-type examples slightly reduce clarification requests and overall action steps, they do not yield consistent improvements. Agents are successful in tasks requiring basic attentional filtering but struggle in scenarios that required mentalising about occluded spaces or weighing the costs of epistemic actions. These findings suggest that structured examples alone are insufficient for robust perspective-taking, underscoring the need for explicit belief tracking, cost modelling, and richer environments to enable socially grounded collaboration in LLM-based agents.

Related papers

• Refer-Agent: A Collaborative Multi-Agent System with Reasoning and Reflection for Referring Video Object Segmentation [50.22481337087162]
  Referring Video Object (RVOS) aims to segment objects in videos based on textual queries.<n>Refer-Agent is a collaborative multi-agent system with alternating reasoning-reflection mechanisms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-03T14:48:12Z)
• Feedback-Induced Performance Decline in LLM-Based Decision-Making [6.5990946334144756]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) can extract context from natural language problem descriptions.<n>This paper studies the behaviour of these models within a Markov Decision Process (MDPs)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-20T10:38:56Z)
• SAND: Boosting LLM Agents with Self-Taught Action Deliberation [54.48979740613828]
  Large Language Model (LLM) agents are commonly tuned with supervised finetuning on ReAct-style expert trajectories or preference optimization over pairwise rollouts.<n>We propose Self-taught ActioN Deliberation (SAND) framework, enabling LLM agents to explicitly deliberate over candidate actions before committing to one.<n>SAND achieves an average 20% improvement over initial supervised finetuning and also outperforms state-of-the-art agent tuning approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-10T05:38:15Z)
• MIRROR: Multi-agent Intra- and Inter-Reflection for Optimized Reasoning in Tool Learning [33.009759731505746]
  Complex tasks involving tool integration pose significant challenges for Large Language Models.<n> Reflection has emerged as an effective strategy for correcting erroneous trajectories in agentic benchmarks.<n>We propose MIRROR, a framework that consists of both intra-reflection, which critically assesses intended actions before execution, and inter-reflection, which further adjusts the trajectory.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-27T03:37:33Z)
• Guiding Reasoning in Small Language Models with LLM Assistance [23.3038074903744]
  Small Language Models cast doubt suitability for tasks demanding deep, multi-step logical deduction.<n>This paper introduces a framework called Small Reasons, Large Hints, which selectively augments SLM reasoning with targeted guidance from large language models.<n>Our experiments on mathematical reasoning datasets demonstrate that targeted external scaffolding significantly improves performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-14T06:32:45Z)
• ReMA: Learning to Meta-think for LLMs with Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning [53.817538122688944]
  We introduce Reinforced Meta-thinking Agents (ReMA) to elicit meta-thinking behaviors from Reasoning of Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>ReMA decouples the reasoning process into two hierarchical agents: a high-level meta-thinking agent responsible for generating strategic oversight and plans, and a low-level reasoning agent for detailed executions.<n> Empirical results from single-turn experiments demonstrate that ReMA outperforms single-agent RL baselines on complex reasoning tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-12T16:05:31Z)
• ARIES: Autonomous Reasoning with LLMs on Interactive Thought Graph Environments [7.508204100423766]
  We introduce ARIES, a multi-agent architecture for reasoning with LLMs.<n>We observe that using off-the-shelf LLMs as policy agents with no supervised fine-tuning (SFT) can yield up to $29%$ higher accuracy on HumanEval.<n>We also conduct a thorough analysis of observed failure modes, highlighting that limitations on LLM sizes and the depth of problem decomposition can be seen as challenges to scaling LLM-guided reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-28T16:28:13Z)
• Scaling Autonomous Agents via Automatic Reward Modeling And Planning [52.39395405893965]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities across a range of tasks.<n>However, they still struggle with problems requiring multi-step decision-making and environmental feedback.<n>We propose a framework that can automatically learn a reward model from the environment without human annotations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-17T18:49:25Z)
• Deliberate Reasoning in Language Models as Structure-Aware Planning with an Accurate World Model [14.480267340831542]
  Structure-aware Planning with an Accurate World Model (SWAP)<n>SWAP integrates structured knowledge representation with learned planning.<n>We evaluate SWAP across diverse reasoning-intensive benchmarks including math reasoning, logical reasoning, and coding tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-04T04:23:36Z)
• Textualized Agent-Style Reasoning for Complex Tasks by Multiple Round LLM Generation [49.27250832754313]
  We present AgentCOT, a llm-based autonomous agent framework. At each step, AgentCOT selects an action and executes it to yield an intermediate result with supporting evidence. We introduce two new strategies to enhance the performance of AgentCOT.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-19T02:20:06Z)
• From Words to Actions: Unveiling the Theoretical Underpinnings of LLM-Driven Autonomous Systems [59.40480894948944]
  Large language model (LLM) empowered agents are able to solve decision-making problems in the physical world. Under this model, the LLM Planner navigates a partially observable Markov decision process (POMDP) by iteratively generating language-based subgoals via prompting. We prove that the pretrained LLM Planner effectively performs Bayesian aggregated imitation learning (BAIL) through in-context learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-30T09:42:54Z)
• Formally Specifying the High-Level Behavior of LLM-Based Agents [24.645319505305316]
  LLMs have emerged as promising tools for solving challenging problems without the need for task-specific finetuned models. Currently, the design and implementation of such agents is ad hoc, as the wide variety of tasks that LLM-based agents may be applied to naturally means there can be no one-size-fits-all approach to agent design. We propose a minimalistic generation framework that simplifies the process of building agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-12T17:24:15Z)

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.