mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

THiNK: Can Large Language Models Think-aloud?

arXiv 2505.20184 ↗First posted 26 May 2025cs.CL cs.AIcited by 3

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation

Abstract (arXiv)

Assessing higher-order thinking skills in large language models (LLMs) remains a fundamental challenge, especially in tasks that go beyond surface-level accuracy. In this work, we propose THiNK (Testing Higher-order Notion of Knowledge), a multi-agent, feedback-driven evaluation framework grounded in Bloom's Taxonomy. THiNK frames reasoning assessment as an iterative task of problem generation, critique, and revision, encouraging LLMs to think-aloud through step-by-step reflection and refinement. This enables a systematic evaluation of both lower-order (e.g., remember, understand) and higher-order (e.g., evaluate, create) thinking skills. We apply THiNK to seven state-of-the-art LLMs and perform a detailed cognitive analysis of their outputs. Results reveal that while models reliably perform lower-order categories well, they struggle with applying knowledge in realistic contexts and exhibit limited abstraction. Structured feedback loops significantly improve reasoning performance, particularly in higher-order thinking. Qualitative evaluations further confirm that THiNK-guided outputs better align with domain logic and problem structure. The code of our framework provides a scalable methodology for probing and enhancing LLM reasoning, offering new directions for evaluation grounded in learning science, which is available at our GitHub repository.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 16 of its 50 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 May 2025.

Builds on

16 of 50 references.

Closest ancestors · 3

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024Do LLMs Exhibit Human-Like Reasoning? Evaluating Theory of Mind in LLMs for Open-Ended Responses9 Jun
  2. 2023HI-TOM: A Benchmark for Evaluating Higher-Order Theory of Mind Reasoning in Large Language Models25 Oct
  3. 2022Structured, flexible, and robust: benchmarking and improving large language models towards more human-like behavior in out-of-distribution reasoning tasks11 May

Other references · 13

  1. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
  2. 2024Qwen2.5 Technical Reportcited by 4,942
  3. 2024GPT-4o System Cardcited by 4,588
  4. 2023Mistral 7Bcited by 3,164
  5. 2022Beyond the Imitation Game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language modelscited by 1,998
  6. 2022Challenging BIG-Bench Tasks and Whether Chain-of-Thought Can Solve Themcited by 1,807
  7. 2024Trust or Escalate: LLM Judges with Provable Guarantees for Human Agreementcited by 105
  8. 2024Large Language Models and Cognitive Science: A Comprehensive Review of Similarities, Differences, and Challengescited by 49
  9. 2023Does ChatGPT have Theory of Mind?cited by 16
  10. 2024A Systematic Assessment of OpenAI o1-Preview for Higher Order Thinking in Educationcited by 16
  11. 2022Psychologically-informed chain-of-thought prompts for metaphor understanding in large language modelscited by 14
  12. 2016A Theme-Rewriting Approach for Generating Algebra Word Problemscited by 10
1 more
  1. 2024MulCogBench: A Multi-modal Cognitive Benchmark Dataset for Evaluating Chinese and English Computational Language Modelscited by 9

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

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

3 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Beyond Chains of Thought: Benchmarking Latent-Space Reasoning Abilities in Large Language Models
  2. 2025Advancing Reasoning in Large Language Models: Promising Methods and Approaches
  3. 2023Chain-of-Thought Hub: A Continuous Effort to Measure Large Language Models' Reasoning Performance
  4. 2025Fast, Slow, and Tool-augmented Thinking for LLMs: A Review
  5. 2025From Thinking to Output: Chain-of-Thought and Text Generation Characteristics in Reasoning Language Models
  6. 2025An Empirical Study of Reasoning Steps in Thinking Code LLMs
  7. 2025Position: On the Methodological Pitfalls of Evaluating Base LLMs for Reasoning
  8. 2023Why Can Large Language Models Generate Correct Chain-of-Thoughts?