Yauwai Yim

Tianshi Zheng, Jiaxin Bai, Yicheng Wang et al. · tencent-ai

While large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities across various natural language processing tasks by acquiring rich factual knowledge from their broad training data, their ability to synthesize and logically reason with this knowledge in complex ways remains underexplored. In this work, we present a systematic evaluation of state-of-the-art LLMs' complex logical reasoning abilities through a novel benchmark of automatically generated complex reasoning questions over general domain and biomedical knowledge graphs. Our extensive experiments, employing diverse in-context learning techniques, reveal that LLMs excel at reasoning over general world knowledge but face significant challenges with specialized domain-specific knowledge. We find that prompting with explicit Chain-of-Thought demonstrations can substantially improve LLM performance on complex logical reasoning tasks with diverse logical operations. Interestingly, our controlled evaluations uncover an asymmetry where LLMs display proficiency at set union operations, but struggle considerably with set intersections - a key building block of logical reasoning. To foster further work, we will publicly release our evaluation benchmark and code.

Chunkit Chan, Cheng Jiayang, Yauwai Yim et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have sparked substantial interest and debate concerning their potential emergence of Theory of Mind (ToM) ability. Theory of mind evaluations currently focuses on testing models using machine-generated data or game settings prone to shortcuts and spurious correlations, which lacks evaluation of machine ToM ability in real-world human interaction scenarios. This poses a pressing demand to develop new real-world scenario benchmarks. We introduce NegotiationToM, a new benchmark designed to stress-test machine ToM in real-world negotiation surrounding covered multi-dimensional mental states (i.e., desires, beliefs, and intentions). Our benchmark builds upon the Belief-Desire-Intention (BDI) agent modeling theory and conducts the necessary empirical experiments to evaluate large language models. Our findings demonstrate that NegotiationToM is challenging for state-of-the-art LLMs, as they consistently perform significantly worse than humans, even when employing the chain-of-thought (CoT) method.

Chunkit Chan, Yauwai Yim, Hongchuan Zeng et al.

Theory of Mind (ToM), the ability to infer mental states in others, is pivotal for human social cognition. Existing evaluations of ToM in LLMs are largely limited to English, neglecting the linguistic diversity that shapes human cognition. This limitation raises a critical question: can LLMs exhibit Multilingual Theory of Mind, which is the capacity to reason about mental states across diverse linguistic contexts? To address this gap, we present XToM, a rigorously validated multilingual benchmark that evaluates ToM across five languages and incorporates diverse, contextually rich task scenarios. Using XToM, we systematically evaluate LLMs (e.g., DeepSeek R1), revealing a pronounced dissonance: while models excel in multilingual language understanding, their ToM performance varies across languages. Our findings expose limitations in LLMs' ability to replicate human-like mentalizing across linguistic contexts.