# Jev-ToM: Evaluating Theory of Mind in Typed Decision Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.18610 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.18610/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 20 of its 41 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 13 Oct 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 20 of 20)

- [Robots That Ask For Help: Uncertainty Alignment for Large Language Model Planners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.01928/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models Fail on Trivial Alterations to Theory-of-Mind Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.08399/) (2023)
- [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)
- [Think Twice: Perspective-Taking Improves Large Language Models' Theory-of-Mind Capabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.10227/) (2023)
- [ToMBench: Benchmarking Theory of Mind in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.15052/) (2024)
- [SimpleToM: Exposing the Gap between Explicit ToM Inference and Implicit ToM Application in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.13648/) (2024)
- [NegotiationToM: A Benchmark for Stress-testing Machine Theory of Mind on Negotiation Surrounding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.13627/) (2024)
- [JEV-as-a-Judge: Accept When Confident, Escalate When Unsure](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.26550/) (2026)
- [Type-Safe Is Not Error-Free: Typed Decision Models Follow the Option Name, Not the Definition Bound to It](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.26758/) (2026)
- [ToMATO: Verbalizing the Mental States of Role-Playing LLMs for Benchmarking Theory of Mind](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.08838/) (2025)
- [Large Language Models as Theory of Mind Aware Generative Agents with Counterfactual Reflection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.15355/) (2025)
- [JevAdvBench: A Benchmark and Black-Box Attacks for Reinforcement Learning for Calibrated Decisions Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.31142/) (2026)
- [Infusing Theory of Mind into Socially Intelligent LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.22887/) (2025)
- [Probability Contracts: Accuracy, Coherence, and Decisions Across LLM Interfaces](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.37470/) (2026)
- [Mnemon: Raw Records, Fast Judgments, Slow Thoughts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.36059/) (2026)
- [MultivationBench: A Benchmark for Multimodal Sequential Motivation Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.26465/) (2026)
- [PACT: Pairwise-Anchored Calibrated Tuning for Single-Token Typed Decisions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.35865/) (2026)
- [Calibrated to Whom? Persona and Language Effects on Cultural Values in JEV](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.36399/) (2026)
- [General Decision Models: Benchmarking and Insights Beyond Jev](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.03935/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Dialogue and collaborative assistants repeatedly judge what a partner knows, believes, or intends. Typed decision models offer a potential alternative to generative large language models for bounded Theory of Mind (ToM) selection. We present Jev-ToM, comparing five typed decision models and seven generative baselines on 11,117 English text questions from nine ToM benchmarks across six capability groups. TypeSafe Jev reaches 73.2% source-balanced accuracy including native controls and ranks first or second across all six capabilities, leading beliefs, goals/desires/intentions, and emotions. Other typed models show distinct strengths across tasks. Separate resource comparisons suggest that Jev could reduce the cost and waiting time of repeated ToM selection. Confidence-based selection remains benchmark-dependent, and supplied reasons can repair errors or overturn correct answers depending on their attachment. Candidate expansion reveals distinct selection and output-validity problems. Related-question cues account for most of Jev's downstream gains, with task-dependent effects from predicted states. The findings motivate testing Jev as a ToM selection component in assistants, with task-specific confidence calibration, candidate design, and output validation as integration priorities.