I-Chen Wu
Publications
MINDGAMES: A Live Arena for Evaluating Social and Strategic Reasoning in Multi-Agent LLMs
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as interactive agents, yet their capacity for social and strategic reasoning over extended interaction remains poorly understood. Existing evaluations rely on static vignettes or single-game benchmarks that cannot capture the sustained, multi-faceted reasoning that real-world multi-agent settings demand. We introduce Mindgames, a multi-game arena and evaluation platform for LLM agents that operationalizes complementary reasoning demands relevant to ``theory of mind'': belief attribution under hidden information, opponent modeling through repeated strategic interaction, cooperative inference under knowledge asymmetries, and sustained deception in social deduction. Built on TextArena, Mindgames provides a unified interaction interface, TrueSkill-based rating, and full trajectory logging across four game environments. We instantiate Mindgames through a 2025 competition cycle hosted at a major AI conference, which assessed 944 submitted agents from 76 teams across four games: Colonel Blotto, Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma, Codenames, and Secret Mafia. Our analysis surfaces both agent-level and evaluation-level limitations: brittle rule adherence remains a major bottleneck, top-performing systems repeatedly rely on explicit structural scaffolding, and leaderboard validity differs sharply across environments. In particular, failure-heavy environments can reward robustness to opponent errors as much as strategic ability, with Secret Mafia exhibiting a pronounced error-survival confound in this cycle. We release a dataset of 29,571 multi-agent games with turn-level observations, actions, and rewards, together with MG-Ref, a deterministic offline tournament protocol that scores new agents against a frozen reference pool of top-ranked, low-error Stage~II submissions under the same error-attribution lens used in this analysis.
Evaluating Game Difficulty in Tetris Block Puzzle
Tetris Block Puzzle is a single player stochastic puzzle in which a player places blocks on an 8 x 8 grid to complete lines; its popular variants have amassed tens of millions of downloads. Despite this reach, there is little principled assessment of which rule sets are more difficult. Inspired by prior work that uses AlphaZero as a strong evaluator for chess variants, we study difficulty in this domain using Stochastic Gumbel AlphaZero (SGAZ), a budget-aware planning agent for stochastic environments. We evaluate rule changes including holding block h, preview holding block p, and additional Tetris block variants using metrics such as training reward and convergence iterations. Empirically, increasing h and p reduces difficulty (higher reward and faster convergence), while adding more Tetris block variants increases difficulty, with the T-pentomino producing the largest slowdown. Through analysis, SGAZ delivers strong play under small simulation budgets, enabling efficient, reproducible comparisons across rule sets and providing a reference for future design in stochastic puzzle games.