# GPT-4o Lacks Core Features of Theory of Mind

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.12150 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.12150/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 14 of its 29 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 12 Feb 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 14 of 14)

- [Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.12712/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models Fail on Trivial Alterations to Theory-of-Mind Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.08399/) (2023)
- [Emergent Analogical Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.09196/) (2022)
- [Evaluating Large Language Models in Theory of Mind Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.02083/) (2023)
- [Neural Theory-of-Mind? On the Limits of Social Intelligence in Large LMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.13312/) (2022)
- [Understanding Social Reasoning in Language Models with Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.15448/) (2023)
- [FANToM: A Benchmark for Stress-testing Machine Theory of Mind in Interactions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.15421/) (2023)
- [Clever Hans or Neural Theory of Mind? Stress Testing Social Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14763/) (2023)
- [Evaluating the World Model Implicit in a Generative Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.03689/) (2024)
- [How FaR Are Large Language Models From Agents with Theory-of-Mind?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.03051/) (2023)
- [Boosting Theory-of-Mind Performance in Large Language Models via Prompting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.11490/) (2023)
- [Do Large Language Models know what humans know?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.01515/) (2022)
- [Theory of Mind in Large Language Models: Examining Performance of 11 State-of-the-Art models vs. Children Aged 7-10 on Advanced Tests](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.20320/) (2023)
- [Towards A Holistic Landscape of Situated Theory of Mind in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.19619/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [A formal definition and meta-model for a machine theory of mind](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.03471/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Do Large Language Models (LLMs) possess a Theory of Mind (ToM)? Research into this question has focused on evaluating LLMs against benchmarks and found success across a range of social tasks. However, these evaluations do not test for the actual representations posited by ToM: namely, a causal model of mental states and behavior. Here, we use a cognitively-grounded definition of ToM to develop and test a new evaluation framework. Specifically, our approach probes whether LLMs have a coherent, domain-general, and consistent model of how mental states cause behavior -- regardless of whether that model matches a human-like ToM. We find that even though LLMs succeed in approximating human judgments in a simple ToM paradigm, they fail at a logically equivalent task and exhibit low consistency between their action predictions and corresponding mental state inferences. As such, these findings suggest that the social proficiency exhibited by LLMs is not the result of a domain-general or consistent ToM.