Assesing LLMs in Art Contexts: Critique Generation and Theory of Mind Evaluation

This study explored how large language models (LLMs) perform in two areas related to art: writing critiques of artworks and reasoning about mental states (Theory of Mind, or ToM) in art-related situations. For the critique generation part, we built a system that combines Noel Carroll's evaluative framework with a broad selection of art criticism theories. The model was prompted to first write a full-length critique and then shorter, more coherent versions using a step-by-step prompting process. These AI-generated critiques were then compared with those written by human experts in a Turing test-style evaluation. In many cases, human subjects had difficulty telling which was which, and the results suggest that LLMs can produce critiques that are not only plausible in style but also rich in interpretation, as long as they are carefully guided. In the second part, we introduced new simple ToM tasks based on situations involving interpretation, emotion, and moral tension, which can appear in the context of art. These go beyond standard false-belief tests and allow for more complex, socially embedded forms of reasoning. We tested 41 recent LLMs and found that their performance varied across tasks and models. In particular, tasks that involved affective or ambiguous situations tended to reveal clearer differences. Taken together, these results help clarify how LLMs respond to complex interpretative challenges, revealing both their cognitive limitations and potential. While our findings do not directly contradict the so-called Generative AI Paradox--the idea that LLMs can produce expert-like output without genuine understanding--they suggest that, depending on how LLMs are instructed, such as through carefully designed prompts, these models may begin to show behaviors that resemble understanding more closely than we might assume.

Breaching the Bottleneck: Evolutionary Transition from Reward-Driven Learning to Reward-Agnostic Domain-Adapted Learning in Neuromodulated Neural Nets

Advanced biological intelligence learns efficiently from an information-rich stream of stimulus information, even when feedback on behaviour quality is sparse or absent. Such learning exploits implicit assumptions about task domains. We refer to such learning as Domain-Adapted Learning (DAL). In contrast, AI learning algorithms rely on explicit externally provided measures of behaviour quality to acquire fit behaviour. This imposes an information bottleneck that precludes learning from diverse non-reward stimulus information, limiting learning efficiency. We consider the question of how biological evolution circumvents this bottleneck to produce DAL. We propose that species first evolve the ability to learn from reward signals, providing inefficient (bottlenecked) but broad adaptivity. From there, integration of non-reward information into the learning process can proceed via gradual accumulation of biases induced by such information on specific task domains. This scenario provides a biologically plausible pathway towards bottleneck-free, domain-adapted learning. Focusing on the second phase of this scenario, we set up a population of NNs with reward-driven learning modelled as Reinforcement Learning (A2C), and allow evolution to improve learning efficiency by integrating non-reward information into the learning process using a neuromodulatory update mechanism. On a navigation task in continuous 2D space, evolved DAL agents show a 300-fold increase in learning speed compared to pure RL agents. Evolution is found to eliminate reliance on reward information altogether, allowing DAL agents to learn from non-reward information exclusively, using local neuromodulation-based connection weight updates only.

An evolutionary model of personality traits related to cooperative behavior using a large language model

This paper aims to shed light on the evolutionary dynamics of diverse and social populations by introducing the rich expressiveness of generative models into the trait expression of social agent-based evolutionary models. Specifically, we focus on the evolution of personality traits in the context of a game-theoretic relationship as a situation in which inter-individual interests exert strong selection pressures. We construct an agent model in which linguistic descriptions of personality traits related to cooperative behavior are used as genes. The deterministic strategies extracted from Large Language Model (LLM) that make behavioral decisions based on these personality traits are used as behavioral traits. The population is evolved according to selection based on average payoff and mutation of genes by asking LLM to slightly modify the parent gene toward cooperative or selfish. Through preliminary experiments and analyses, we clarify that such a model can indeed exhibit the evolution of cooperative behavior based on the diverse and higher-order representation of personality traits. We also observed the repeated intrusion of cooperative and selfish personality traits through changes in the expression of personality traits, and found that the emerging words in the evolved gene well reflected the behavioral tendency of its personality in terms of their semantics.