tombench-eval
Theory of Mind in Large Language Models: Assessment and Enhancement — Chen et al. (2025) (arXiv:2505.00026, 2025)
What this evaluates
Evaluates large language models' Theory of Mind capabilities by testing their ability to infer mental states (beliefs, intentions, emotions) across multiple orders of reasoning using story-based narratives. The benchmark probes whether models can accurately track character perspectives and answer questions about what different agents know or believe in complex social scenarios.
Datasets
- TOMBENCH — total ?; splits: test (-1)
Metrics
accuracy(primary) — range: [0, 1]- Percentage of test samples where the model's selected multiple-choice option exactly matches the ground truth answer. Evaluation is based solely on the final answer option to minimize subjective judgment.
Input / output format
Input: A narrative story describing a scenario involving characters' actions and mental states, followed by a multiple-choice question about the characters' beliefs, intentions, or emotions.
Output: A single selected option from the provided multiple-choice answers.
Scoring recipe
correct = 0
for pred, gold in zip(predictions, gold_answers):
if pred.strip().lower() == gold.strip().lower():
correct += 1
metric_value = correct / len(predictions)
Common pitfalls
- Evaluation relies solely on exact match of the final option, which may not reflect true comprehension of the reasoning process.
- The dataset is bilingual (Chinese and English), so evaluation must be conducted separately or carefully aligned for each language to avoid cross-lingual contamination.
Evidence (verbatim from paper)
All test samples in TOMBENCH follow a multiple-choice question answering format, which minimizes subjective judgment. However, the multiple-choice question answering format poses a challenge in determining whether LLMs truly comprehend the questions and answer them correctly, as evaluation is based solely on the final answer option.
Citation
@misc{chen2025theoryofmind,
title={Theory of Mind in Large Language Models: Assessment and Enhancement},
author={Chen et al. (2025)},
year={2025},
note={arXiv:2505.00026}
}
- arXiv: 2505.00026