Beyond Belief Nesting: Rethinking Higher-Order Theory of Mind in Large Language Models
Organizations: Department of Psychological and Cognitive Sciences, Tsinghua University · IDG/McGovern Institute for Brain Research, Tsinghua University · Department of Cognitive Sciences, University of California, Irvine
Abstract
Theory of mind (ToM), the ability to reason about others' mental states, underlies effective communication and coordination. Its higher-order form enables reasoning over nested perspectives in strategic interactions. However, existing evaluations often equate belief-nesting depth with reasoning order, allowing nominally higher-order questions to admit lower-order shortcuts. We formalize effective order through the distinct events supporting successive belief prefixes, revealing widespread order inflation across existing benchmarks. We introduce HopToM, with certified full-order questions and controls for lower-order alternatives. Under direct prompting, mean accuracy across four frontier LLMs falls from 73.5% at first order to 20.0% at fourth order, and human participants also struggle. Causal interventions link a recurring class of errors to evidence for shallower belief prefixes. We introduce HopTrace, a plug-and-play inference-time method that encodes each interaction once into perspective records and resolves nested queries deterministically. On certified narrative questions, it improves fourth- and fifth-order accuracy by 22.0 and 38.5 percentage points over strong prompting baselines, while using 20-39 times fewer tokens than multi-call methods. These results sharpen how higher-order ToM is evaluated and offer a practical way to improve perspective reasoning in interactive agents.
Figures & tables
| Benchmark | Mean | Full order | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ToMi | 1,998 | 2 | 2 | 1.36 | 36.2% |
| ExploreToM | 3,298 | 2 | 2 | 1.07 | 6.6% |
| Hi-ToM | 120 | 4 | 4 | 2.07 | 2.5% |
| [2pt/2pt] HopToM (Ours) | 200 | 5 | 5 | 5.00 | 100% |
| Subset | Mean | Full order | State match | counts | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All | 1 | 1.00 | 100% | 50.0% | 120 |
| 2 | 1.40 | 40.0% | 66.7% | 72 / 48 | |
| 3 | 1.68 | 9.2% | 79.2% | 50 / 59 / 11 | |
| 4 | 2.07 | 2.5% | 85.0% | 26 / 63 / 28 / 3 | |
| w/o Claims | 2 | 1.29 | 29.3% | 73.3% | 53 / 22 |
| 3 | 1.47 | 2.7% | 86.7% | 42 / 31 / 2 |
| Model | 1st | 2nd | 3rd | 4th | 5th | All |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPT-6 Sol | 92.0 | 62.0 | 58.5 | 32.5 | 36.0 | 56.2 |
| Claude Opus 5.5 | 69.5 | 33.0 | 42.5 | 16.0 | 21.5 | 36.5 |
| Gemini 3 Flash | 72.5 | 34.5 | 41.0 | 17.0 | 16.0 | 36.2 |
| DeepSeek-V4-Pro | 60.0 | 49.0 | 32.5 | 14.5 | 14.0 | 34.0 |
| Average | 73.5 | 44.6 | 43.6 | 20.0 | 21.9 | 40.7 |
| HopToM (True Higher-Order) | Hi-ToM | |||||||
| Method | 1st | 2nd | 3rd | 4th | 5th | All | All | |
| GPT-6 Sol | CoT | 94 | 58 | 52 | 42 | 44 | 58.0 | 80.3 |
| TimeToM | 78 | 83 | 56 | 58 | 50 | 65.0 | 78.5 | |
| RecToM | 85 | 74 | 52 | 58 | 36 | 61.0 | 79.2 | |
| [2pt/2pt] | HopTrace | 89 | 70 | 67 | 76 | 90 | 78.4 | 82.4 |
| DeepSeek | CoT | 76 | 68 | 35 | 23 | 14 | 43.2 | 62.5 |
| Benchmark | Source | Max level | Size | Format | Order convention |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ToMi † | Le et al. (2019) | 2 | 5,994 test questions | open-ended | nesting depth |
| Hi-ToM † | Wu et al. (2023) | 4 | 120 stories, 600 unique questions | 15-way choice | nesting depth |
| FANToM | Kim et al. (2023) | 2 | 256 conversations, 870 short sets | choice, free-form, list | nesting depth |
| OpenToM | Xu et al. (2024) | 2 | 696 narratives, 16,008 questions | 2/3-way choice | nesting depth |
| ToMBench | Chen et al. (2024) | 2 | 2,860 items | 4-way choice | task taxonomy |
| ExploreToM † | Sclar et al. (2025) | 2 | 619 stories, 13,309 questions (sample) | open-ended, yes/no | nesting depth |
Appendix figures & tables3 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Family | Type | Definition |
|---|---|---|
| Asymmetric Epistemic Access | present but inattentive | An agent is physically present during an event but does not attend to it and therefore does not acquire the relevant information. |
| secret observation | An agent observes an event without one or more other agents knowing that the observation occurred. | |
| Temporal Presence Dynamics | leave and return | An agent leaves before a relevant event and later returns without direct access to what occurred during the absence. |
| late joining | An agent enters after earlier events have occurred and lacks the information available before arrival. | |
| Strategic Information Presentation | deceptive communication | An agent intentionally provides false or misleading information to influence another agent’s belief. |
| Unintentional Epistemic Error | observation misperception | An agent observes an event but incorrectly interprets what happened. |
| 1st | 2nd | 3rd | 4th | 5th | All | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Certified | 58.3 | 31.7 | 58.3 | 6.7 | 11.7 | 33.3 |
| Control | – | 76.7 | 55.0 | 41.7 | 11.7 | 46.3 |
| Overall | 58.3 | 54.2 | 56.7 | 24.2 | 11.7 | 39.1 |
| Model | Open | MC | Certified | Controls | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Opus 5.5 | 34.0 | 92.4 | 35.2 89.2 | 32.5 96.5 | |
| GPT-6 Sol | 55.4 | 58.3 | 0.12 | 55.4 55.6 | 55.5 61.8 |
| Gemini 3 Flash | 34.2 | 44.0 | 34.0 45.0 | 34.5 42.8 | |
| DeepSeek-V4-Pro | 36.2 | 30.0 | 34.2 33.2 | 38.8 26.0 |
Theory of Mind
Theory of Mind studies how people and AI infer others’ beliefs, goals, and knowledge to predict behavior and coordinate interaction.
See all 92 papers