Skip to main content
archive
Search Submit Donate Log in
Press Enter to search · Advanced search

Computer Science > Computation and Language

arXiv:2502.16940 (cs)
[Submitted on 24 Feb 2025 (v1), last revised 22 Jul 2025 (this version, v2)]

Title:Reasoning Does Not Necessarily Improve Role-Playing Ability

Authors:Xiachong Feng, Longxu Dou, Lingpeng Kong
View a PDF of the paper titled Reasoning Does Not Necessarily Improve Role-Playing Ability, by Xiachong Feng and 2 other authors
View PDF HTML (experimental)
Abstract:The application of role-playing large language models (LLMs) is rapidly expanding in both academic and commercial domains, driving an increasing demand for high-precision role-playing models. Simultaneously, the rapid advancement of reasoning techniques has continuously pushed the performance boundaries of LLMs. This intersection of practical role-playing demands and evolving reasoning capabilities raises an important research question: "Can reasoning techniques enhance the role-playing capabilities of LLMs?" To address this, we conduct a comprehensive study using 6 role-playing benchmarks, 24 LLMs, and 3 distinct role-playing strategies, comparing the effectiveness of direct zero-shot role-playing, role-playing with Chain-of-Thought (CoT), and role-playing using reasoning-optimized LLMs. Our findings reveal that CoT may reduce role-playing performance, reasoning-optimized LLMs are unsuitable for role-playing, reasoning ability disrupts the role-playing scaling law, large models still lack proficiency in advanced role-playing, and Chinese role-playing performance surpasses English role-playing performance. Furthermore, based on extensive experimental results, we propose two promising future research directions: Role-aware CoT for improving role-playing LLMs and Reinforcement Learning for role-playing LLMs, aiming to enhance the adaptability, consistency, and effectiveness of role-playing LLMs for both research and real-world applications.
Subjects: Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
Cite as: arXiv:2502.16940 [cs.CL]
  (or arXiv:2502.16940v2 [cs.CL] for this version)
  https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2502.16940
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

Submission history

From: Xiachong Feng [view email]
[v1] Mon, 24 Feb 2025 08:08:41 UTC (196 KB)
[v2] Tue, 22 Jul 2025 02:01:16 UTC (196 KB)
Full-text links:

Access Paper:

    View a PDF of the paper titled Reasoning Does Not Necessarily Improve Role-Playing Ability, by Xiachong Feng and 2 other authors
  • View PDF
  • HTML (experimental)
  • TeX Source
license icon view license

Current browse context:

cs.CL
< prev   |   next >
new | recent | 2025-02
Change to browse by:
cs
cs.AI

References & Citations

  • NASA ADS
  • Google Scholar
  • Semantic Scholar
Loading...

BibTeX formatted citation

Data provided by:

Bookmark

BibSonomy Reddit

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Replicate (What is Replicate?)
Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)
TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Recommenders and Search Tools

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
  • Author
  • Venue
  • Institution
  • Topic

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)
We gratefully acknowledge support from our major funders, member institutions, , and all contributors.
About · Help · Contact · Subscribe · Copyright · Privacy · Accessibility · Operational Status (opens in new tab)
Major funding support from
Simons Foundation Simons Foundation International Schmidt Sciences