TMGBench: A Systematic Game Benchmark for Evaluating Strategic Reasoning Abilities of LLMs

The rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs) has accelerated their application in reasoning, with strategic reasoning drawing increasing attention. To evaluate LLMs' strategic reasoning capabilities, game theory, with its concise structure, has become a preferred approach. However, current research focuses on a limited selection of games, resulting in low coverage. Classic game scenarios risk data leakage, and existing benchmarks often lack extensibility, making them inadequate for evaluating state-of-the-art models. To address these challenges, we propose TMGBench, a benchmark with comprehensive game type coverage, novel scenarios, and flexible organization. Specifically, we incorporate all 144 game types summarized by the Robinson-Goforth topology of 2x2 games, constructed as classic games. We also employ synthetic data generation to create diverse, higher-quality scenarios through topic guidance and human inspection, referred to as story-based games. Lastly, we provide a sustainable framework for increasingly powerful LLMs by treating these games as atomic units and organizing them into more complex forms via sequential, parallel, and nested structures. Our comprehensive evaluation of mainstream LLMs covers tests on rational reasoning, robustness, Theory-of-Mind (ToM), and reasoning in complex forms. Results reveal flaws in accuracy, consistency, and varying mastery of ToM. Additionally, o1-mini, OpenAI's latest reasoning model, achieved accuracy rates of 66.6%, 60.0%, and 70.0% on sequential, parallel, and nested games, highlighting TMGBench's challenges.

Mitigating Gender Bias in Code Large Language Models via Model Editing

In recent years, with the maturation of large language model (LLM) technology and the emergence of high-quality programming code datasets, researchers have become increasingly confident in addressing the challenges of program synthesis automatically. However, since most of the training samples for LLMs are unscreened, it is inevitable that LLMs' performance may not align with real-world scenarios, leading to the presence of social bias. To evaluate and quantify the gender bias in code LLMs, we propose a dataset named CodeGenBias (Gender Bias in the Code Generation) and an evaluation metric called FB-Score (Factual Bias Score) based on the actual gender distribution of correlative professions. With the help of CodeGenBias and FB-Score, we evaluate and analyze the gender bias in eight mainstream Code LLMs. Previous work has demonstrated that model editing methods that perform well in knowledge editing have the potential to mitigate social bias in LLMs. Therefore, we develop a model editing approach named MG-Editing (Multi-Granularity model Editing), which includes the locating and editing phases. Our model editing method MG-Editing can be applied at five different levels of model parameter granularity: full parameters level, layer level, module level, row level, and neuron level. Extensive experiments not only demonstrate that our MG-Editing can effectively mitigate the gender bias in code LLMs while maintaining their general code generation capabilities, but also showcase its excellent generalization. At the same time, the experimental results show that, considering both the gender bias of the model and its general code generation capability, MG-Editing is most effective when applied at the row and neuron levels of granularity.

UNO Arena for Evaluating Sequential Decision-Making Capability of Large Language Models

Sequential decision-making refers to algorithms that take into account the dynamics of the environment, where early decisions affect subsequent decisions. With large language models (LLMs) demonstrating powerful capabilities between tasks, we can't help but ask: Can Current LLMs Effectively Make Sequential Decisions? In order to answer this question, we propose the UNO Arena based on the card game UNO to evaluate the sequential decision-making capability of LLMs and explain in detail why we choose UNO. In UNO Arena, We evaluate the sequential decision-making capability of LLMs dynamically with novel metrics based Monte Carlo methods. We set up random players, DQN-based reinforcement learning players, and LLM players (e.g. GPT-4, Gemini-pro) for comparison testing. Furthermore, in order to improve the sequential decision-making capability of LLMs, we propose the TUTRI player, which can involves having LLMs reflect their own actions wtih the summary of game history and the game strategy. Numerous experiments demonstrate that the TUTRI player achieves a notable breakthrough in the performance of sequential decision-making compared to the vanilla LLM player.