Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social reasoning necessitates the capacity of theory of mind (ToM), the ability to contextualise and attribute mental states to others without having access to their internal cognitive structure. Recent machine learning approaches to ToM have demonstrated that we can train the observer to read the past and present behaviours of other agents and infer their beliefs (including false beliefs about things that no longer exist), goals, intentions and future actions. The challenges arise when the behavioural space is complex, demanding skilful space navigation for rapidly changing contexts for an extended period. We tackle the challenges by equipping the observer with novel neural memory mechanisms to encode, and hierarchical attention to selectively retrieve information about others. The memories allow rapid, selective querying of distal related past behaviours of others to deliberatively reason about their current mental state, beliefs and future behaviours. This results in ToMMY, a theory of mind model that learns to reason while making little assumptions about the underlying mental processes. We also construct a new suite of experiments to demonstrate that memories facilitate the learning process and achieve better theory of mind performance, especially for high-demand false-belief tasks that require inferring through multiple steps of changes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.010 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".