mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Towards properly implementing Theory of Mind in AI systems: An account of four misconceptions

arXiv 2503.16468 ↗First posted 28 Feb 2025cs.HC cs.AIcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The search for effective collaboration between humans and computer systems is one of the biggest challenges in Artificial Intelligence. One of the more effective mechanisms that humans use to coordinate with one another is theory of mind (ToM). ToM can be described as the ability to `take someone else's perspective and make estimations of their beliefs, desires and intentions, in order to make sense of their behaviour and attitudes towards the world'. If leveraged properly, this skill can be very useful in Human-AI collaboration. This introduces the question how we implement ToM when building an AI system. Humans and AI Systems work quite differently, and ToM is a multifaceted concept, each facet rooted in different research traditions across the cognitive and developmental sciences. We observe that researchers from artificial intelligence and the computing sciences, ourselves included, often have difficulties finding their way in the ToM literature. In this paper, we identify four common misconceptions around ToM that we believe should be taken into account when developing an AI system. We have hyperbolised these misconceptions for the sake of the argument, but add nuance in their discussion. The misconceptions we discuss are: (1) "Humans Use a ToM Module, So AI Systems Should As Well". (2) "Every Social Interaction Requires (Advanced) ToM". (3) "All ToM is the Same". (4) "Current Systems Already Have ToM". After discussing the misconception, we end each section by providing tentative guidelines on how the misconception can be overcome.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 115 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Feb 2025.

Builds on

23 of 115 references.

References · 23

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,132
  3. 2024OLMo: Accelerating the Science of Language Modelscited by 599
  4. 2023Large Language Models Fail on Trivial Alterations to Theory-of-Mind Taskscited by 288
  5. 2022Emergent Analogical Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 239
  6. 2018Machine Theory of Mindcited by 222
  7. 2023Evaluating Large Language Models in Theory of Mind Taskscited by 217
  8. 2023FANToM: A Benchmark for Stress-testing Machine Theory of Mind in Interactionscited by 162
  9. 2023Clever Hans or Neural Theory of Mind? Stress Testing Social Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 161
  10. 2024MMToM-QA: Multimodal Theory of Mind Question Answeringcited by 84
  11. 2020Aligning Superhuman AI with Human Behavior: Chess as a Model Systemcited by 78
  12. 2024ToMBench: Benchmarking Theory of Mind in Large Language Modelscited by 70
11 more
  1. 2023Boosting Theory-of-Mind Performance in Large Language Models via Promptingcited by 64
  2. 2024LLMs achieve adult human performance on higher-order theory of mind taskscited by 59
  3. 2021Hybrid Intelligencecited by 55
  4. 2023Theory of Mind in Large Language Models: Examining Performance of 11 State-of-the-Art models vs. Children Aged 7-10 on Advanced Testscited by 46
  5. 2023ToMChallenges: A Principle-Guided Dataset and Diverse Evaluation Tasks for Exploring Theory of Mindcited by 28
  6. 2024TMGBench: A Systematic Game Benchmark for Evaluating Strategic Reasoning Abilities of LLMscited by 21
  7. 2023Large Language Models: The Need for Nuance in Current Debates and a Pragmatic Perspective on Understandingcited by 20
  8. 2024A Notion of Complexity for Theory of Mind via Discrete World Modelscited by 16
  9. 2023Do large language models solve verbal analogies like children do?cited by 13
  10. 2024Does ChatGPT Have a Mind?cited by 13
  11. 2024GPT-4o reads the mind in the eyescited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 2.

3 papers.