Theory of Minds: Understanding Behavior in Groups through Inverse Planning
Open accessAbstract
Human social behavior is structured by relationships. We form teams, groups, tribes, and alliances at all scales of human life. These structures guide multi-agent cooperation and competition, but when we observe others these underlying relationships are typically unobservable and hence must be inferred. Humans make these inferences intuitively and flexibly, often making rapid generalizations about the latent relationships that underlie behavior from just sparse and noisy observations. Rapid and accurate inferences are important for determining who to cooperate with, who to compete with, and how to cooperate in order to compete. Towards the goal of building machine-learning algorithms with human-like social intelligence, we develop a generative model of multiagent action understanding based on a novel representation for these latent relationships called Composable Team Hierarchies (CTH). This representation is grounded in the formalism of stochastic games and multi-agent reinforcement learning. We use CTH as a target for Bayesian inference yielding a new algorithm for understanding behavior in groups that can both infer hidden relationships as well as predict future actions for multiple agents interacting together. Our algorithm rapidly recovers an underlying causal model of how agents relate in spatial stochastic games from just a few observations. The patterns of inference made by this algorithm closely correspond with human judgments and the algorithm makes the same rapid generalizations that people do.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Sustaining cooperation is an essential problem that enables individuals to achieve better outcomes than they could achieve on their own.
“Sustaining cooperation is an essential problem that enables individuals to achieve better outcomes than they could achieve on their own [63, 66, 68].”
From Cooperate or Collapse: Emergence of Sustainable Cooperation in a Society of LLM Agents (2024) · cites this paper as [66]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
How to grow a mind: Statistics, structure, and abstraction
Tenenbaum, J. B., Kemp, C., Griffiths, T. L., & Goodman, N. D. (2011) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1192788 · Cited by 1,815 · see citing works
Self-citationA Unified Game-Theoretic Approach to Multiagent Reinforcement Learning
Lanctot, M., Zambaldi, V., Gruslys, A., Lazaridou, A., Tuyls, K., Perolat, J., Silver, D., & Graepel, T. (2017) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1711.00832 · Cited by 295 · see citing works
Learning with Opponent-Learning Awareness
Foerster, J., Chen, R. Y., Al-Shedivat, M., Whiteson, S., Abbeel, P., & Mordatch, I. (2018) · International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems · doi:10.65109/hgwa8807 · Cited by 215 · see citing works
A multi-agent reinforcement learning model of common-pool resource appropriation
Perolat, J., Leibo, J. Z., Zambaldi, V., Beattie, C., Tuyls, K., & Graepel, T. (2017) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1707.06600 · Cited by 109 · see citing works
Maintaining cooperation in complex social dilemmas using deep reinforcement learning
Lerer, A., & Peysakhovich, A. (2017) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1707.01068 · Cited by 101 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Cooperate or Collapse: Emergence of Sustainable Cooperation in a Society of LLM Agents
Piatti, G., Jin, Z., Kleiman-Weiner, M., Schölkopf, B., Sachan, M., & Mihalcea, R. (2024) · Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 37 · doi:10.52202/079017-3548 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
“Sustaining cooperation is an essential problem that enables individuals to achieve better outcomes than they could achieve on their own [62, 65, 67].”
Self-citation
- Authors
- Shum, M., Kleiman-Weiner, M., Littman, M. L., & Tenenbaum, J. B.
- Affiliations
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
- Brown University (US)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
- Published
- 2019-07-17
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 01
- Pages
- 6163-6170
- ISSN
- 2159-5399 (ISSN-L)
- 2374-3468
- OpenAlex
- W2905322625
- Cited by
- 14
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3
- FWCI
- 5.62
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.aaai.org/ (unspecified)
- Locations
- Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (1637614)
- Companhia Brasileira de Metalurgia e Mineração
- Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation
- Keywords
- theory of mind, inverse treatment planning, social intelligence, stochastic games, multi-agent reinforcement learning, Bayesian inference, causal inference, team hierarchy, human social behavior
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review