LLMs achieve adult human performance on higher-order theory of mind tasks
Authors:
Winnie Street,
John Oliver Siy,
Geoff Keeling,
Adrien Baranes,
Benjamin Barnett,
Michael McKibben,
Tatenda Kanyere,
Alison Lentz,
Blaise Aguera y Arcas,
Robin I. M. Dunbar
Abstract:
This paper examines the extent to which large language models (LLMs) have developed higher-order theory of mind (ToM); the human ability to reason about multiple mental and emotional states in a recursive manner (e.g. I think that you believe that she knows). This paper builds on prior work by introducing a handwritten test suite -- Multi-Order Theory of Mind Q&A -- and using it to compare the per…
▽ More
This paper examines the extent to which large language models (LLMs) have developed higher-order theory of mind (ToM); the human ability to reason about multiple mental and emotional states in a recursive manner (e.g. I think that you believe that she knows). This paper builds on prior work by introducing a handwritten test suite -- Multi-Order Theory of Mind Q&A -- and using it to compare the performance of five LLMs to a newly gathered adult human benchmark. We find that GPT-4 and Flan-PaLM reach adult-level and near adult-level performance on ToM tasks overall, and that GPT-4 exceeds adult performance on 6th order inferences. Our results suggest that there is an interplay between model size and finetuning for the realisation of ToM abilities, and that the best-performing LLMs have developed a generalised capacity for ToM. Given the role that higher-order ToM plays in a wide range of cooperative and competitive human behaviours, these findings have significant implications for user-facing LLM applications.
△ Less
Submitted 31 May, 2024; v1 submitted 29 May, 2024;
originally announced May 2024.
The Ethics of Advanced AI Assistants
Authors:
Iason Gabriel,
Arianna Manzini,
Geoff Keeling,
Lisa Anne Hendricks,
Verena Rieser,
Hasan Iqbal,
Nenad TomaĊĦev,
Ira Ktena,
Zachary Kenton,
Mikel Rodriguez,
Seliem El-Sayed,
Sasha Brown,
Canfer Akbulut,
Andrew Trask,
Edward Hughes,
A. Stevie Bergman,
Renee Shelby,
Nahema Marchal,
Conor Griffin,
Juan Mateos-Garcia,
Laura Weidinger,
Winnie Street,
Benjamin Lange,
Alex Ingerman,
Alison Lentz
, et al. (32 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
This paper focuses on the opportunities and the ethical and societal risks posed by advanced AI assistants. We define advanced AI assistants as artificial agents with natural language interfaces, whose function is to plan and execute sequences of actions on behalf of a user, across one or more domains, in line with the user's expectations. The paper starts by considering the technology itself, pro…
▽ More
This paper focuses on the opportunities and the ethical and societal risks posed by advanced AI assistants. We define advanced AI assistants as artificial agents with natural language interfaces, whose function is to plan and execute sequences of actions on behalf of a user, across one or more domains, in line with the user's expectations. The paper starts by considering the technology itself, providing an overview of AI assistants, their technical foundations and potential range of applications. It then explores questions around AI value alignment, well-being, safety and malicious uses. Extending the circle of inquiry further, we next consider the relationship between advanced AI assistants and individual users in more detail, exploring topics such as manipulation and persuasion, anthropomorphism, appropriate relationships, trust and privacy. With this analysis in place, we consider the deployment of advanced assistants at a societal scale, focusing on cooperation, equity and access, misinformation, economic impact, the environment and how best to evaluate advanced AI assistants. Finally, we conclude by providing a range of recommendations for researchers, developers, policymakers and public stakeholders.
△ Less
Submitted 28 April, 2024; v1 submitted 24 April, 2024;
originally announced April 2024.
