Playing Along: Learning a Double-Agent Defender for Belief Steering via Theory of Mind
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks
Abstract (arXiv)
As large language models (LLMs) become the engine behind conversational systems, their ability to reason about the intentions and states of their dialogue partners (i.e., form and use a theory-of-mind, or ToM) becomes increasingly critical for safe interaction with potentially adversarial partners. We propose a novel privacy-themed ToM challenge, ToM for Steering Beliefs (ToM-SB), in which a defender must act as a Double Agent to steer the beliefs of an attacker with partial prior knowledge within a shared universe. To succeed on ToM-SB, the defender must engage with and form a ToM of the attacker, with a goal of fooling the attacker into believing they have succeeded in extracting sensitive information. We find that strong frontier models like Gemini3-Pro and GPT-5.4 struggle on ToM-SB, often failing to fool attackers in hard scenarios with partial attacker prior knowledge, even when prompted to reason about the attacker's beliefs (ToM prompting). To close this gap, we train models on ToM-SB to act as AI Double Agents using reinforcement learning, testing both fooling and ToM rewards. Notably, we find a bidirectionally emergent relationship between ToM and attacker-fooling: rewarding fooling success alone improves ToM, and rewarding ToM alone improves fooling. Across four attackers with different strengths, six defender methods, and both in-distribution and out-of-distribution (OOD) evaluation, we find that gains in ToM and attacker-fooling are well-correlated, highlighting belief modeling as a key driver of success on ToM-SB. AI Double Agents that combine both ToM and fooling rewards yield the strongest fooling and ToM performance, outperforming Gemini3-Pro and GPT-5.4 with ToM prompting on hard scenarios. We also show that ToM-SB and AI Double Agents can be extended to stronger attackers, demonstrating generalization to OOD settings and the upgradability of our task.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 45 of its 51 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Apr 2026.
Builds on
45 of 51 references.
Closest ancestors · 4
Same direction, newest first
- 2026Evaluating Theory of Mind and Internal Beliefs in LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems24 Feb
- 2024SOTOPIA-π: Interactive Learning of Socially Intelligent Language Agents13 Mar
- 2023SOTOPIA: Interactive Evaluation for Social Intelligence in Language Agents18 Oct
- 2022Improving alignment of dialogue agents via targeted human judgements28 Sep
Other references · 41
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
- 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 8,851
- 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,195
- 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 7,916
- 2022Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedbackcited by 2,950
- 2025Understanding R1-Zero-Like Training: A Critical Perspectivecited by 1,276
- 2023Llama Guard: LLM-based Input-Output Safeguard for Human-AI Conversationscited by 1,124
- 2025OpenAI GPT-5 System Cardcited by 910
- 2024Jailbreaking Leading Safety-Aligned LLMs with Simple Adaptive Attackscited by 450
- 2023NeMo Guardrails: A Toolkit for Controllable and Safe LLM Applications with Programmable Railscited by 347
- 2023Large Language Models Fail on Trivial Alterations to Theory-of-Mind Taskscited by 288
- 2016Deep Reinforcement Learning for Dialogue Generationcited by 286
29 more
- 2022Neural Theory-of-Mind? On the Limits of Social Intelligence in Large LMscited by 220
- 2023Can LLMs Keep a Secret? Testing Privacy Implications of Language Models via Contextual Integrity Theorycited by 218
- 2023Evaluating Large Language Models in Theory of Mind Taskscited by 217
- 2019Persuasion for Good: Towards a Personalized Persuasive Dialogue System for Social Goodcited by 207
- 2017Deal or No Deal? End-to-End Learning for Negotiation Dialoguescited by 202
- 2023Beyond Memorization: Violating Privacy Via Inference with Large Language Modelscited by 167
- 2023Understanding Social Reasoning in Language Models with Language Modelscited by 166
- 2023FANToM: A Benchmark for Stress-testing Machine Theory of Mind in Interactionscited by 162
- 2023Clever Hans or Neural Theory of Mind? Stress Testing Social Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 161
- 2018Decoupling Strategy and Generation in Negotiation Dialoguescited by 156
- 2025LlamaFirewall: An open source guardrail system for building secure AI agentscited by 114
- 2025X-Teaming: Multi-Turn Jailbreaks and Defenses with Adaptive Multi-Agentscited by 112
- 2025Unveiling Privacy Risks in LLM Agent Memorycited by 99
- 2024ToMBench: Benchmarking Theory of Mind in Large Language Modelscited by 70
- 2024Building Guardrails for Large Language Modelscited by 61
- 2021CaSiNo: A Corpus of Campsite Negotiation Dialogues for Automatic Negotiation Systemscited by 60
- 2025Beyond Single-Turn: A Survey on Multi-Turn Interactions with Large Language Modelscited by 58
- 2024OpenToM: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Evaluating Theory-of-Mind Reasoning Capabilities of Large Language Modelscited by 54
- 2018Dialogue Learning with Human Teaching and Feedback in End-to-End Trainable Task-Oriented Dialogue Systemscited by 53
- 2024Don't Say No: Jailbreaking LLM by Suppressing Refusalcited by 53
- 2024SimpleToM: Exposing the Gap between Explicit ToM Inference and Implicit ToM Application in LLMscited by 51
- 2024Private Attribute Inference from Images with Vision-Language Modelscited by 35
- 2025Chasing Moving Targets with Online Self-Play Reinforcement Learning for Safer Language Modelscited by 33
- 2024Position: Theory of Mind Benchmarks are Broken for Large Language Modelscited by 30
- 2025Theory of Mind in Large Language Models: Assessment and Enhancementcited by 24
- 2025The Sum Leaks More Than Its Parts: Compositional Privacy Risks and Mitigations in Multi-Agent Collaborationcited by 19
- 2025Multi-Turn Jailbreaks Are Simpler Than They Seemcited by 15
- 2025Automating Deception: Scalable Multi-Turn LLM Jailbreakscited by 7
- 2025Proactive defense against LLM Jailbreakcited by 6
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Theory of Mind and Persuasion Beyond Conversation: Assessing the Capacity of LLMs to Induce Belief States via Planning and Action
- 2026Understanding Artificial Theory of Mind: Perturbed Tasks and Reasoning in Large Language Models
- 2025Large Language Models as Theory of Mind Aware Generative Agents with Counterfactual Reflection
- 2025Enhancing Conversational Agents with Theory of Mind: Aligning Beliefs, Desires, and Intentions for Human-Like Interaction
- 2025Infusing Theory of Mind into Socially Intelligent LLM Agents
- 2026Adaptive Theory of Mind for LLM-based Multi-Agent Coordination
- 2025ToMAP: Training Opponent-Aware LLM Persuaders with Theory of Mind
- 2026Avalon-ToM-Bench: Evaluating Fine-Grained Theory of Mind via Asymmetric Game Mechanics