Showing 1–16 of 16 results for author: Santos, F C

Does Spending More Always Ensure Higher Cooperation? An Analysis of Institutional Incentives on Heterogeneous Networks

Authors: Theodor Cimpeanu, Francisco C Santos, The Anh Han

Abstract: Humans have developed considerable machinery used at scale to create policies and to distribute incentives, yet we are forever seeking ways in which to improve upon these, our institutions. Especially when funding is limited, it is imperative to optimise spending without sacrificing positive outcomes, a challenge which has often been approached within several areas of social, life and engineering… ▽ More Humans have developed considerable machinery used at scale to create policies and to distribute incentives, yet we are forever seeking ways in which to improve upon these, our institutions. Especially when funding is limited, it is imperative to optimise spending without sacrificing positive outcomes, a challenge which has often been approached within several areas of social, life and engineering sciences. These studies often neglect the availability of information, cost restraints, or the underlying complex network structures, which define real-world populations. Here, we have extended these models, including the aforementioned concerns, but also tested the robustness of their findings to stochastic social learning paradigms. Akin to real-world decisions on how best to distribute endowments, we study several incentive schemes, which consider information about the overall population, local neighbourhoods, or the level of influence which a cooperative node has in the network, selectively rewarding cooperative behaviour if certain criteria are met. Following a transition towards a more realistic network setting and stochastic behavioural update rule, we found that carelessly promoting cooperators can often lead to their downfall in socially diverse settings. These emergent cyclic patterns not only damage cooperation, but also decimate the budgets of external investors. Our findings highlight the complexity of designing effective and cogent investment policies in socially diverse populations. △ Less

Submitted 16 January, 2023; originally announced January 2023.

Comments: arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1905.04964

The art of compensation: how hybrid teams solve collective risk dilemmas

Authors: Inês Terrucha, Elias Fernández Domingos, Francisco C. Santos, Pieter Simoens, Tom Lenaerts

Abstract: It is widely known how the human ability to cooperate has influenced the thriving of our species. However, as we move towards a hybrid human-machine future, it is still unclear how the introduction of AI agents in our social interactions will affect this cooperative capacity. Within the context of the one-shot collective risk dilemma, where enough members of a group must cooperate in order to avoi… ▽ More It is widely known how the human ability to cooperate has influenced the thriving of our species. However, as we move towards a hybrid human-machine future, it is still unclear how the introduction of AI agents in our social interactions will affect this cooperative capacity. Within the context of the one-shot collective risk dilemma, where enough members of a group must cooperate in order to avoid a collective disaster, we study the evolutionary dynamics of cooperation in a hybrid population made of both adaptive and fixed-behavior agents. Specifically, we show how the first learn to adapt their behavior to compensate for the behavior of the latter. The less the (artificially) fixed agents cooperate, the more the adaptive population is motivated to cooperate, and vice-versa, especially when the risk is higher. By pinpointing how adaptive agents avoid their share of costly cooperation if the fixed-behavior agents implement a cooperative policy, our work hints towards an unbalanced hybrid world. On one hand, this means that introducing cooperative AI agents within our society might unburden human efforts. Nevertheless, it is important to note that costless artificial cooperation might not be realistic, and more than deploying AI systems that carry the cooperative effort, we must focus on mechanisms that nudge shared cooperation among all members in the hybrid system. △ Less

Submitted 13 May, 2022; originally announced May 2022.

Comments: 8 pages, 5 figures, accepted at workshop ALA 2022 (AAMAS 2022)

Learning Collective Action under Risk Diversity

Authors: Ramona Merhej, Fernando P. Santos, Francisco S. Melo, Mohamed Chetouani, Francisco C. Santos

Abstract: Collective risk dilemmas (CRDs) are a class of n-player games that represent societal challenges where groups need to coordinate to avoid the risk of a disastrous outcome. Multi-agent systems incurring such dilemmas face difficulties achieving cooperation and often converge to sub-optimal, risk-dominant solutions where everyone defects. In this paper we investigate the consequences of risk diversi… ▽ More Collective risk dilemmas (CRDs) are a class of n-player games that represent societal challenges where groups need to coordinate to avoid the risk of a disastrous outcome. Multi-agent systems incurring such dilemmas face difficulties achieving cooperation and often converge to sub-optimal, risk-dominant solutions where everyone defects. In this paper we investigate the consequences of risk diversity in groups of agents learning to play CRDs. We find that risk diversity places new challenges to cooperation that are not observed in homogeneous groups. We show that increasing risk diversity significantly reduces overall cooperation and hinders collective target achievement. It leads to asymmetrical changes in agents' policies -- i.e. the increase in contributions from individuals at high risk is unable to compensate for the decrease in contributions from individuals at low risk -- which overall reduces the total contributions in a population. When comparing RL behaviors to rational individualistic and social behaviors, we find that RL populations converge to fairer contributions among agents. Our results highlight the need for aligning risk perceptions among agents or develop new learning techniques that explicitly account for risk diversity. △ Less

Submitted 30 January, 2022; originally announced January 2022.

Comments: 17 pages, 24 figures. Accepted at the Cooperative AI Workshop at the 35th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS 2021)

Cooperation dynamics under pandemic risks and heterogeneous economic interdependence

Authors: Manuel Chica, Juan M. Hernandez, Francisco C. Santos

Abstract: The spread of COVID-19 and ensuing containment measures have accentuated the profound interdependence among nations or regions. This has been particularly evident in tourism, one of the sectors most affected by uncoordinated mobility restrictions. The impact of this interdependence on the tendency to adopt less or more restrictive measures is hard to evaluate, more so if diversity in economic expo… ▽ More The spread of COVID-19 and ensuing containment measures have accentuated the profound interdependence among nations or regions. This has been particularly evident in tourism, one of the sectors most affected by uncoordinated mobility restrictions. The impact of this interdependence on the tendency to adopt less or more restrictive measures is hard to evaluate, more so if diversity in economic exposures to citizens' mobility are considered. Here, we address this problem by developing an analytical and computational game-theoretical model encompassing the conflicts arising from the need to control the economic effects of global risks, such as in the COVID-19 pandemic. The model includes the individual costs derived from severe restrictions imposed by governments, including the resulting economic interdependence among all the parties involved in the game. By using tourism-based data, the model is enriched with actual heterogeneous income losses, such that every player has a different economic cost when applying restrictions. We show that economic interdependence enhances cooperation because of the decline in the expected payoffs by free-riding parties (i.e., those neglecting the application of mobility restrictions). Furthermore, we show (analytically and through numerical simulations) that these cross-exposures can transform the nature of the cooperation dilemma each region or country faces, modifying the position of the fixed points and the size of the basins of attraction that characterize this class of games. Finally, our results suggest that heterogeneity among regions may be used to leverage the impact of intervention policies by ensuring an agreement among the most relevant initial set of cooperators. △ Less

Submitted 30 July, 2021; originally announced August 2021.

Signalling boosts the evolution of cooperation in repeated group interactions

Authors: Luis A. Martinez-Vaquero, Francisco C. Santos, Vito Trianni

Abstract: Many biological and social systems show significant levels of collective action. Several cooperation mechanisms have been proposed, yet they have been mostly studied independently. Among these, direct reciprocity supports cooperation on the basis of repeated interactions among individuals. Signals and quorum dynamics may also drive cooperation. Here, we resort to an evolutionary game theoretical m… ▽ More Many biological and social systems show significant levels of collective action. Several cooperation mechanisms have been proposed, yet they have been mostly studied independently. Among these, direct reciprocity supports cooperation on the basis of repeated interactions among individuals. Signals and quorum dynamics may also drive cooperation. Here, we resort to an evolutionary game theoretical model to jointly analyse these two mechanisms and study the conditions in which evolution selects for direct reciprocity, signalling, or their combination. We show that signalling alone leads to higher levels of cooperation than when combined with reciprocity, while offering additional robustness against errors. Specifically, successful strategies in the realm of direct reciprocity are often not selected in the presence of signalling, and memory of past interactions is only exploited opportunistically in case of earlier coordination failure. Differently, signalling always evolves, even when costly. In the light of these results, it may be easier to understand why direct reciprocity has been observed only in a limited number of cases among non-humans, whereas signalling is widespread at all levels of complexity. △ Less

Submitted 13 April, 2021; originally announced April 2021.

Journal ref: Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 17(172), 20200635 (2020)

Voluntary safety commitments provide an escape from over-regulation in AI development

Authors: The Anh Han, Tom Lenaerts, Francisco C. Santos, Luis Moniz Pereira

Abstract: With the introduction of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and related technologies in our daily lives, fear and anxiety about their misuse as well as the hidden biases in their creation have led to a demand for regulation to address such issues. Yet blindly regulating an innovation process that is not well understood, may stifle this process and reduce benefits that society may gain from the generated… ▽ More With the introduction of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and related technologies in our daily lives, fear and anxiety about their misuse as well as the hidden biases in their creation have led to a demand for regulation to address such issues. Yet blindly regulating an innovation process that is not well understood, may stifle this process and reduce benefits that society may gain from the generated technology, even under the best intentions. In this paper, starting from a baseline model that captures the fundamental dynamics of a race for domain supremacy using AI technology, we demonstrate how socially unwanted outcomes may be produced when sanctioning is applied unconditionally to risk-taking, i.e. potentially unsafe, behaviours. As an alternative to resolve the detrimental effect of over-regulation, we propose a voluntary commitment approach wherein technologists have the freedom of choice between independently pursuing their course of actions or establishing binding agreements to act safely, with sanctioning of those that do not abide to what they pledged. Overall, this work reveals for the first time how voluntary commitments, with sanctions either by peers or an institution, leads to socially beneficial outcomes in all scenarios envisageable in a short-term race towards domain supremacy through AI technology. These results are directly relevant for the design of governance and regulatory policies that aim to ensure an ethical and responsible AI technology development process. △ Less

Submitted 8 April, 2021; originally announced April 2021.

Delegation to autonomous agents promotes cooperation in collective-risk dilemmas

Authors: Elias Fernández Domingos, Inês Terrucha, Rémi Suchon, Jelena Grujić, Juan C. Burguillo, Francisco C. Santos, Tom Lenaerts

Abstract: Home assistant chat-bots, self-driving cars, drones or automated negotiations are some of the several examples of autonomous (artificial) agents that have pervaded our society. These agents enable the automation of multiple tasks, saving time and (human) effort. However, their presence in social settings raises the need for a better understanding of their effect on social interactions and how they… ▽ More Home assistant chat-bots, self-driving cars, drones or automated negotiations are some of the several examples of autonomous (artificial) agents that have pervaded our society. These agents enable the automation of multiple tasks, saving time and (human) effort. However, their presence in social settings raises the need for a better understanding of their effect on social interactions and how they may be used to enhance cooperation towards the public good, instead of hindering it. To this end, we present an experimental study of human delegation to autonomous agents and hybrid human-agent interactions centered on a public goods dilemma shaped by a collective risk. Our aim to understand experimentally whether the presence of autonomous agents has a positive or negative impact on social behaviour, fairness and cooperation in such a dilemma. Our results show that cooperation increases when participants delegate their actions to an artificial agent that plays on their behalf. Yet, this positive effect is reduced when humans interact in hybrid human-agent groups. Finally, we show that humans are biased towards agent behaviour, assuming that they will contribute less to the collective effort. △ Less

Submitted 13 March, 2021; originally announced March 2021.

ACM Class: J.4

Evolution of collective fairness in complex networks through degree-based role assignment

Authors: Andreia Sofia Teixeira, Francisco C. Santos, Alexandre P. Francisco, Fernando P. Santos

Abstract: From social contracts to climate agreements, individuals engage in groups that must collectively reach decisions with varying levels of equality and fairness. These dilemmas also pervade Distributed Artificial Intelligence, in domains such as automated negotiation, conflict resolution or resource allocation. As evidenced by the well-known Ultimatum Game -- where a Proposer has to divide a resource… ▽ More From social contracts to climate agreements, individuals engage in groups that must collectively reach decisions with varying levels of equality and fairness. These dilemmas also pervade Distributed Artificial Intelligence, in domains such as automated negotiation, conflict resolution or resource allocation. As evidenced by the well-known Ultimatum Game -- where a Proposer has to divide a resource with a Responder -- payoff-maximizing outcomes are frequently at odds with fairness. Eliciting equality in populations of self-regarding agents requires judicious interventions. Here we use knowledge about agents' social networks to implement fairness mechanisms, in the context of Multiplayer Ultimatum Games. We focus on network-based role assignment and show that preferentially attributing the role of Proposer to low-connected nodes increases the fairness levels in a population. We evaluate the effectiveness of low-degree Proposer assignment considering networks with different average connectivity, group sizes, and group voting rules when accepting proposals (e.g. majority or unanimity). We further show that low-degree Proposer assignment is efficient, not only optimizing fairness, but also the average payoff level in the population. Finally, we show that stricter voting rules (i.e., imposing an accepting consensus as requirement for collectives to accept a proposal) attenuates the unfairness that results from situations where high-degree nodes (hubs) are the natural candidates to play as Proposers. Our results suggest new routes to use role assignment and voting mechanisms to prevent unfair behaviors from spreading on complex networks. △ Less

Submitted 26 February, 2021; originally announced February 2021.

Artificial Intelligence Development Races in Heterogeneous Settings

Authors: Theodor Cimpeanu, Francisco C. Santos, Luis Moniz Pereira, Tom Lenaerts, The Anh Han

Abstract: Regulation of advanced technologies such as Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become increasingly important, given the associated risks and apparent ethical issues. With the great benefits promised from being able to first supply such technologies, safety precautions and societal consequences might be ignored or shortchanged in exchange for speeding up the development, therefore engendering a racin… ▽ More Regulation of advanced technologies such as Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become increasingly important, given the associated risks and apparent ethical issues. With the great benefits promised from being able to first supply such technologies, safety precautions and societal consequences might be ignored or shortchanged in exchange for speeding up the development, therefore engendering a racing narrative among the developers. Starting from a game-theoretical model describing an idealised technology race in a fully connected world of players, here we investigate how different interaction structures among race participants can alter collective choices and requirements for regulatory actions. Our findings indicate that, when participants portray a strong diversity in terms of connections and peer-influence (e.g., when scale-free networks shape interactions among parties), the conflicts that exist in homogeneous settings are significantly reduced, thereby lessening the need for regulatory actions. Furthermore, our results suggest that technology governance and regulation may profit from the world's patent heterogeneity and inequality among firms and nations, so as to enable the design and implementation of meticulous interventions on a minority of participants, which is capable of influencing an entire population towards an ethical and sustainable use of advanced technologies. △ Less

Submitted 4 January, 2022; v1 submitted 30 December, 2020; originally announced December 2020.

Comments: 42 pages, 13 figures, accepted for publication in Nature Scientific Reports

Mediating Artificial Intelligence Developments through Negative and Positive Incentives

Authors: The Anh Han, Luis Moniz Pereira, Tom Lenaerts, Francisco C. Santos

Abstract: The field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) is going through a period of great expectations, introducing a certain level of anxiety in research, business and also policy. This anxiety is further energised by an AI race narrative that makes people believe they might be missing out. Whether real or not, a belief in this narrative may be detrimental as some stake-holders will feel obliged to cut corner… ▽ More The field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) is going through a period of great expectations, introducing a certain level of anxiety in research, business and also policy. This anxiety is further energised by an AI race narrative that makes people believe they might be missing out. Whether real or not, a belief in this narrative may be detrimental as some stake-holders will feel obliged to cut corners on safety precautions, or ignore societal consequences just to "win". Starting from a baseline model that describes a broad class of technology races where winners draw a significant benefit compared to others (such as AI advances, patent race, pharmaceutical technologies), we investigate here how positive (rewards) and negative (punishments) incentives may beneficially influence the outcomes. We uncover conditions in which punishment is either capable of reducing the development speed of unsafe participants or has the capacity to reduce innovation through over-regulation. Alternatively, we show that, in several scenarios, rewarding those that follow safety measures may increase the development speed while ensuring safe choices. Moreover, in {the latter} regimes, rewards do not suffer from the issue of over-regulation as is the case for punishment. Overall, our findings provide valuable insights into the nature and kinds of regulatory actions most suitable to improve safety compliance in the contexts of both smooth and sudden technological shifts. △ Less

Submitted 1 October, 2020; originally announced October 2020.

Navigating the Landscape of Multiplayer Games

Authors: Shayegan Omidshafiei, Karl Tuyls, Wojciech M. Czarnecki, Francisco C. Santos, Mark Rowland, Jerome Connor, Daniel Hennes, Paul Muller, Julien Perolat, Bart De Vylder, Audrunas Gruslys, Remi Munos

Abstract: Multiplayer games have long been used as testbeds in artificial intelligence research, aptly referred to as the Drosophila of artificial intelligence. Traditionally, researchers have focused on using well-known games to build strong agents. This progress, however, can be better informed by characterizing games and their topological landscape. Tackling this latter question can facilitate understand… ▽ More Multiplayer games have long been used as testbeds in artificial intelligence research, aptly referred to as the Drosophila of artificial intelligence. Traditionally, researchers have focused on using well-known games to build strong agents. This progress, however, can be better informed by characterizing games and their topological landscape. Tackling this latter question can facilitate understanding of agents and help determine what game an agent should target next as part of its training. Here, we show how network measures applied to response graphs of large-scale games enable the creation of a landscape of games, quantifying relationships between games of varying sizes and characteristics. We illustrate our findings in domains ranging from canonical games to complex empirical games capturing the performance of trained agents pitted against one another. Our results culminate in a demonstration leveraging this information to generate new and interesting games, including mixtures of empirical games synthesized from real world games. △ Less

Submitted 17 November, 2020; v1 submitted 4 May, 2020; originally announced May 2020.

Timing uncertainty in collective risk dilemmas encourages group reciprocation and polarization

Authors: Elias Fernández Domingos, Jelena Grujić, Juan C. Burguillo, Georg Kirchsteiger, Francisco C. Santos, Tom Lenaerts

Abstract: Human social dilemmas are often shaped by actions involving uncertain goals and returns that may only be achieved in the future. Climate action, voluntary vaccination and other prospective choices stand as paramount examples of this setting. In this context, as well as in many other social dilemmas, uncertainty may produce non-trivial effects. Whereas uncertainty about collective targets and their… ▽ More Human social dilemmas are often shaped by actions involving uncertain goals and returns that may only be achieved in the future. Climate action, voluntary vaccination and other prospective choices stand as paramount examples of this setting. In this context, as well as in many other social dilemmas, uncertainty may produce non-trivial effects. Whereas uncertainty about collective targets and their impact were shown to negatively affect group coordination and success, no information is available about timing uncertainty, i.e. how uncertainty about when the target needs to be reached affects the outcome as well as the decision-making. Here we show experimentally, through a collective dilemma wherein groups of participants need to avoid a tipping point under the risk of collective loss, that timing uncertainty prompts not only early generosity but also polarized contributions, in which participants' total contributions are distributed more unfairly than when there is no uncertainty. Analyzing participant behavior reveals, under uncertainty, an increase in reciprocal strategies wherein contributions are conditional on the previous donations of the other participants, a group analogue of the well-known Tit-for-Tat strategy. Although large timing uncertainty appears to reduce collective success, groups that successfully collect the required amount show strong reciprocal coordination. This conclusion is supported by a game theoretic model examining the dominance of behaviors in case of timing uncertainty. In general, timing uncertainty casts a shadow on the future that leads participants to respond early, encouraging reciprocal behaviors, and unequal contributions. △ Less

Submitted 5 May, 2020; v1 submitted 16 March, 2020; originally announced March 2020.

Comments: 43 pages including supporting information

MSC Class: 91 ACM Class: J.4

Counterfactual thinking in cooperation dynamics

Authors: Luis Moniz Pereira, Francisco C. Santos

Abstract: Counterfactual Thinking is a human cognitive ability studied in a wide variety of domains. It captures the process of reasoning about a past event that did not occur, namely what would have happened had this event occurred, or, otherwise, to reason about an event that did occur but what would ensue had it not. Given the wide cognitive empowerment of counterfactual reasoning in the human individual… ▽ More Counterfactual Thinking is a human cognitive ability studied in a wide variety of domains. It captures the process of reasoning about a past event that did not occur, namely what would have happened had this event occurred, or, otherwise, to reason about an event that did occur but what would ensue had it not. Given the wide cognitive empowerment of counterfactual reasoning in the human individual, the question arises of how the presence of individuals with this capability may improve cooperation in populations of self-regarding individuals. Here we propose a mathematical model, grounded on Evolutionary Game Theory, to examine the population dynamics emerging from the interplay between counterfactual thinking and social learning (i.e., individuals that learn from the actions and success of others) whenever the individuals in the population face a collective dilemma. Our results suggest that counterfactual reasoning fosters coordination in collective action problems occurring in large populations, and has a limited impact on cooperation dilemmas in which coordination is not required. Moreover, we show that a small prevalence of individuals resorting to counterfactual thinking is enough to nudge an entire population towards highly cooperative standards. △ Less

Submitted 18 December, 2019; originally announced December 2019.

Comments: 18 pages

MSC Class: I.6; J.5; J.6 ACM Class: I.6; J.5; J.6

Journal ref: in: Model-based reason-ing in science and technology - Inferential models for Logic, Language, Cognition and Computation, Collection on Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics (SAPERE), Springer, 2019

To regulate or not: a social dynamics analysis of the race for AI supremacy

Authors: The Anh Han, Luis Moniz Pereira, Francisco C. Santos, Tom Lenaerts

Abstract: Rapid technological advancements in AI as well as the growing deployment of intelligent technologies in new application domains are currently driving the competition between businesses, nations and regions. This race for technological supremacy creates a complex ecology of choices that may lead to negative consequences, in particular, when ethical and safety procedures are underestimated or even i… ▽ More Rapid technological advancements in AI as well as the growing deployment of intelligent technologies in new application domains are currently driving the competition between businesses, nations and regions. This race for technological supremacy creates a complex ecology of choices that may lead to negative consequences, in particular, when ethical and safety procedures are underestimated or even ignored. As a consequence, different actors are urging to consider both the normative and social impact of these technological advancements. As there is no easy access to data describing this AI race, theoretical models are necessary to understand its dynamics, allowing for the identification of when, how and which procedures need to be put in place to favour outcomes beneficial for all. We show that, next to the risks of setbacks and being reprimanded for unsafe behaviour, the time-scale in which AI supremacy can be achieved plays a crucial role. When this supremacy can be achieved in a short term, those who completely ignore the safety precautions are bound to win the race but at a cost to society, apparently requiring regulatory actions. Our analysis reveals that blindly imposing regulations may not have anticipated effect as only for specific conditions a dilemma arises between what individually preferred and globally beneficial. Similar observations can be made for the long-term development case. Yet different from the short term situation, certain conditions require the promotion of risk-taking as opposed to compliance to safety regulations in order to improve social welfare. These results remain robust when two or several actors are involved in the race and when collective rather than individual setbacks are produced by risk-taking behaviour. When defining codes of conduct and regulatory policies for AI, a clear understanding about the time-scale of the race is required. △ Less

Submitted 16 January, 2020; v1 submitted 26 July, 2019; originally announced July 2019.

Norms for Beneficial A.I.: A Computational Analysis of the Societal Value Alignment Problem

Authors: Pedro Fernandes, Francisco C. Santos, Manuel Lopes

Abstract: The rise of artificial intelligence (A.I.) based systems is already offering substantial benefits to the society as a whole. However, these systems may also enclose potential conflicts and unintended consequences. Notably, people will tend to adopt an A.I. system if it confers them an advantage, at which point non-adopters might push for a strong regulation if that advantage for adopters is at a c… ▽ More The rise of artificial intelligence (A.I.) based systems is already offering substantial benefits to the society as a whole. However, these systems may also enclose potential conflicts and unintended consequences. Notably, people will tend to adopt an A.I. system if it confers them an advantage, at which point non-adopters might push for a strong regulation if that advantage for adopters is at a cost for them. Here we propose an agent-based game-theoretical model for these conflicts, where agents may decide to resort to A.I. to use and acquire additional information on the payoffs of a stochastic game, striving to bring insights from simulation to what has been, hitherto, a mostly philosophical discussion. We frame our results under the current discussion on ethical A.I. and the conflict between individual and societal gains: the societal value alignment problem. We test the arising equilibria in the adoption of A.I. technology under different norms followed by artificial agents, their ensuing benefits, and the emergent levels of wealth inequality. We show that without any regulation, purely selfish A.I. systems will have the strongest advantage, even when a utilitarian A.I. provides significant benefits for the individual and the society. Nevertheless, we show that it is possible to develop A.I. systems following human conscious policies that, when introduced in society, lead to an equilibrium where the gains for the adopters are not at a cost for non-adopters, thus increasing the overall wealth of the population and lowering inequality. However, as shown, a self-organised adoption of such policies would require external regulation. △ Less

Submitted 22 December, 2020; v1 submitted 26 June, 2019; originally announced July 2019.

Journal ref: AI Communications, vol. 33, no. 3-6, pp. 155-171, 2020

Exogenous Rewards for Promoting Cooperation in Scale-Free Networks

Authors: Theodor Cimpeanu, The Anh Han, Francisco C. Santos

Abstract: The design of mechanisms that encourage pro-social behaviours in populations of self-regarding agents is recognised as a major theoretical challenge within several areas of social, life and engineering sciences. When interference from external parties is considered, several heuristics have been identified as capable of engineering a desired collective behaviour at a minimal cost. However, these st… ▽ More The design of mechanisms that encourage pro-social behaviours in populations of self-regarding agents is recognised as a major theoretical challenge within several areas of social, life and engineering sciences. When interference from external parties is considered, several heuristics have been identified as capable of engineering a desired collective behaviour at a minimal cost. However, these studies neglect the diverse nature of contexts and social structures that characterise real-world populations. Here we analyse the impact of diversity by means of scale-free interaction networks with high and low levels of clustering, and test various interference mechanisms using simulations of agents facing a cooperative dilemma. Our results show that interference on scale-free networks is not trivial and that distinct levels of clustering react differently to each interference mechanism. As such, we argue that no tailored response fits all scale-free networks and present which mechanisms are more efficient at fostering cooperation in both types of networks. Finally, we discuss the pitfalls of considering reckless interference mechanisms. △ Less

Submitted 17 May, 2019; v1 submitted 13 May, 2019; originally announced May 2019.

Comments: 8 pages, 5 figures, to appear in the Proceedings of the Artifical Life Conference 2019, 29 July - 2 August 2019, Newcastle, England