Haibo Tong, Zeyang Yue, Feifei Zhao Institute of automation, Chinese academy of science, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Erliang Lin, Lu Jia, Ruolin Chen Institute of automation, Chinese academy of science, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Yinqian Sun Institute of automation, Chinese academy of science, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Qian Zhang Institute of automation, Chinese academy of science, Chinese Academy of Sciences 等 9 位作者
Whether Large Language Models (LLMs) truly possess human-like Theory of Mind (ToM) capabilities has garnered increasing attention. However, existing benchmarks remain largely restricted to narrow paradigms like false belief tasks, failing to capture the full spectrum of human cognitive mechanisms. We introduce CogToM, a comprehensive, theoretically grounded benchmark comprising over 8000 bilingual instances across 46 paradigms, validated by 49 human annotators. A systematic evaluation of 22 representative models, including frontier models like GPT-5.1 and Qwen3-Max, reveals significant performance heterogeneities and highlights persistent bottlenecks in specific dimensions. Further analysis based on human cognitive patterns suggests potential divergences between LLM and human cognitive structures. CogToM offers a robust instrument and perspective for investigating the evolving cognitive boundaries of LLMs. We release our code and data at https://github.com/Beijing-AISI/CogToM.
尚无 AI 解读，展示原文摘要
cs.CL
Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · 2026 · 正式发表
Yang Yue, Zhiqi Chen, Rui Lu, Andrew Zhao, Zhaokai Wang, Yang Yue, Shiji Song, Gao Huang
Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has recently demonstrated notable success in enhancing the reasoning performance of large language models (LLMs), particularly on mathematics and programming tasks. Similar to how traditional RL helps agents explore and learn new strategies, RLVR is believed to enable LLMs to continuously self-improve, thus acquiring novel reasoning abilities beyond those of the corresponding base models. In this study we critically examine the current state of RLVR by systematically probing the reasoning capability boundaries of RLVR-trained LLMs across various model families, RL algorithms, and math, coding, and visual reasoning benchmarks, using pass@k at large k values as the evaluation metric. Surprisingly, we find that the current training setup does not elicit fundamentally new reasoning patterns. While RLVR-trained models outperform their base models at small k (e.g., k = 1), the base models achieve a higher pass@k score when k is large. Coverage and perplexity analyses show that the observed reasoning abilities originate from and are bounded by the base model. Treating the base model as an upper bound, our quantitative analysis shows that six popular RLVR algorithms perform similarly and remain far from optimal in leveraging the potential of the base model. By contrast, we find that distillation can introduce new reasoning patterns from the teacher and genuinely expand the model's reasoning capabilities. Overall, our findings suggest that current RLVR methods have not yet realized the potential of RL to elicit truly novel reasoning abilities in LLMs. This highlights the need for improved RL paradigms, such as continual scaling and multi-turn agent-environment interaction, to unlock this potential.