Large Language Models Think Too Fast To Explore Effectively
Lan Pan, Hanbo Xie, Robert C. Wilson
Abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged with many intellectual capacities. While numerous benchmarks assess their intelligence, limited attention has been given to their ability to explore-an essential capacity for discovering new information and adapting to novel environments in both natural and artificial systems. The extent to which LLMs can effectively explore, particularly in open-ended tasks, remains unclear. This study investigates whether LLMs can surpass humans in exploration during an open-ended task, using Little Alchemy 2 as a paradigm, where agents combine elements to discover new ones. Results show most LLMs underperform compared to humans, except for the o1 model, with those traditional LLMs relying primarily on uncertainty-driven strategies, unlike humans who balance uncertainty and empowerment. Results indicate that traditional reasoning-focused LLMs, such as GPT-4o, exhibit a significantly faster and less detailed reasoning process, limiting their exploratory performance. In contrast, the DeepSeek reasoning model demonstrates prolonged, iterative thought processes marked by repetitive analysis of combinations and past trials, reflecting a more thorough and human-like exploration strategy. Representational analysis of the models with Sparse Autoencoders (SAE) revealed that uncertainty and choices are represented at earlier transformer blocks, while empowerment values are processed later, causing LLMs to think too fast and make premature decisions, hindering effective exploration. These findings shed light on the limitations of LLM exploration and suggest directions for improving their adaptability.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 20789019-fd7b-4eaa-955d-c12a5efd99b7Cited by top-tier papers2
- Large Language Models Develop Novel Social Biases Through Adaptive ExplorationAddison J. Wu, Ryan Liu, Xuechunzi Bai, Thomas GriffithsICML 2026 · 4 citations
- EVOLvE: Evaluating and Optimizing LLMs For In-Context ExplorationAllen Nie, Yi Su, Bo Chang, Jonathan Lee et al.ICML 2025
Builds on10
- Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language ModelsJason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 22,562 citations
- Planning to Explore via Self-Supervised World ModelsRamanan Sekar, Oleh Rybkin, Kostas Daniilidis, Pieter Abbeel et al.ICML 2020 · 489 citations
- Can large language models explore in-context?Akshay Krishnamurthy, Keegan Harris, Dylan J. Foster, Cyril Zhang et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 95 citations
- Toward Efficient Exploration by Large Language Model AgentsDilip Arumugam, Thomas L. GriffithsICLR 2026 · 17 citations
- In-Context Learning for Pure ExplorationAlessio Russo, Ryan Welch, Aldo PacchianoICLR 2026 · 5 citations
Related papers
- ReSearch: Learning to Reason with Search for LLMs via Reinforcement LearningMingyang Chen, Linzhuang Sun, Tianpeng Li, Haoze Sun et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 125 citations
- LLM Strategic Reasoning: Agentic Study through Behavioral Game TheoryJingru Jia, Zehua Yuan, Junhao Pan, Paul McNamara et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 23 citations
- Training a Scientific Reasoning Model for ChemistrySiddharth Narayanan, James D. Braza, Ryan-Rhys Griffiths, Albert Bou et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 62 citations
- Mind the Gap: The Divergence Between Human and LLM-Generated TasksYi-Long Lu, Jiajun Song, Chunhui Zhang, Wei WangAAAI 2026
- Dynamics of Cognitive Heterogeneity: Investigating Behavioral Biases in Multi-Stage Supply Chains with LLM-Based SimulationJiuyun Jiang, Yuecheng Hong, Bo Yang, Jin Yang et al.ACL 2026
