BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Francisco C. Santos

Francisco C. Santos contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Computer Science and Game Theoryphysics.soc-phArtificial Intelligencecs.CYMultiagent SystemsSocial and Information Networksecon.THMachine Learning

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
8works
0followers
8topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

8 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Artificial Intelligence Development Races in Heterogeneous Settings

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.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Learning Collective Action under Risk Diversity

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.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

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

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.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Cooperation dynamics under pandemic risks and heterogeneous economic interdependence

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.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

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

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.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Timing uncertainty in collective risk dilemmas encourages group reciprocation and polarization

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.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

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

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.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2019arXiv

Exogenous Rewards for Promoting Cooperation in Scale-Free Networks

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.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access