Hybrid Human-Agent Social Dilemmas in Energy Markets

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.11834v1
• Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2026 11:59:35 GMT
• Title: Hybrid Human-Agent Social Dilemmas in Energy Markets
• Abstract summary: We study how cooperative behaviors can emerge in hybrid populations where humans delegate strategic decision-making to autonomous agents.<n>We introduce artificial agents that use globally observable signals to increase coordination.<n>We show that artificial agents can shift the learning dynamics to favour coordination outcomes.
• Score: 0.45880283710344055
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: In hybrid populations where humans delegate strategic decision-making to autonomous agents, understanding when and how cooperative behaviors can emerge remains a key challenge. We study this problem in the context of energy load management: consumer agents schedule their appliance use under demand-dependent pricing. This structure can create a social dilemma where everybody would benefit from coordination, but in equilibrium agents often choose to incur the congestion costs that cooperative turn-taking would avoid. To address the problem of coordination, we introduce artificial agents that use globally observable signals to increase coordination. Using evolutionary dynamics, and reinforcement learning experiments, we show that artificial agents can shift the learning dynamics to favour coordination outcomes. An often neglected problem is partial adoption: what happens when the technology of artificial agents is in the early adoption stages? We analyze mixed populations of adopters and non-adopters, demonstrating that unilateral entry is feasible: adopters are not structurally penalized, and partial adoption can still improve aggregate outcomes. However, in some parameter regimes, non-adopters may benefit disproportionately from the cooperation induced by adopters. This asymmetry, while not precluding beneficial entry, warrants consideration in deployment, and highlights strategic issues around the adoption of AI technology in multiagent settings.

Related papers

• Co-Evolution in Agentic Systems: Toward Self-Directed Evolution Beyond Human Design [55.30329388138526]
  This survey focuses on co-evolution in agentic systems, a multi-component form of self-evolution in which multiple agents and their environment impose adaptive pressure on one another.<n>To organize existing papers, we propose a progressive three-stage taxonomy that traces how the system gradually sheds human-engineered constraints.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-10T23:10:40Z)
• Mechanism Design Is Not Enough: Prosocial Agents for Cooperative AI [49.05972944310475]
  We show that when contracts cannot distinguish all relevant future contingencies, there is a strictly positive welfare loss that no realistic mechanism can eliminate.<n>We show that prosocial agents, who weigh others' welfare alongside their own, can close this gap and achieve outcomes that are socially superior and individually beneficial.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-08T19:37:07Z)
• SynAgent: Generalizable Cooperative Humanoid Manipulation via Solo-to-Cooperative Agent Synergy [59.86199649493784]
  Controllable cooperative humanoid manipulation is a fundamental yet challenging problem for embodied intelligence.<n>We present SynAgent, a framework that enables scalable and physically plausible cooperative manipulation.<n>In experiments, SynAgent significantly outperforms existing baselines in both cooperative imitation and trajectory-conditioned control.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-20T17:46:20Z)
• Emergent Social Intelligence Risks in Generative Multi-Agent Systems [106.60961969939676]
  Multi-agent systems are rapidly moving from lab prototypes to real-world deployments, where they jointly plan, negotiate, and allocate resources to solve complex tasks.<n>Here, we present a pioneer study of such emergent multi-agent risk in pathologies that involve competition over shared resources, sequential handoff collaboration, collective decision aggregation, and others.<n>We observe that such group behaviors arise frequently across repeated trials and a wide range of interaction conditions, rather than as rare or pathological cases.<n>These findings expose the dark side of intelligent multi-agent systems: a social intelligence risk where agent collectives spontaneously reproduce familiar failure patterns from human societies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-29T17:10:28Z)
• Position: AI Agents Are Not (Yet) a Panacea for Social Simulation [62.891898598784415]
  Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have spurred growing interest in using LLM-integrated agents for social simulation.<n>This position paper argues that LLM-based agents are not (yet) a panacea for social simulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-19T06:35:07Z)
• Mapping Human Anti-collusion Mechanisms to Multi-agent AI [0.0]
  We develop a taxonomy of human anti-collusion mechanisms, including sanctions, leniency & whistleblowing, monitoring & auditing, market design, and governance.<n>For each mechanism, we propose implementation approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-01T14:30:37Z)
• GenAI-based Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning towards Distributed Agent Intelligence: A Generative-RL Agent Perspective [35.589506360952925]
  We argue for a transformative paradigm shift from reactive to proactive multi-agent intelligence through generative AI-based reinforcement learning.<n>Rather than responding to immediate observations, generative-RL agents can model environment evolution, predict other agents' behaviors, generate coordinated action sequences, and engage in strategic reasoning accounting for long-term dynamics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-13T05:02:43Z)
• Resource Rational Contractualism Should Guide AI Alignment [69.07915246220985]
  Contractualist alignment proposes grounding decisions in agreements that diverse stakeholders would endorse.<n>We propose Resource-Rationalism: a framework where AI systems approximate the agreements rational parties would form.<n>An RRC-aligned agent would not only operate efficiently, but also be equipped to dynamically adapt to and interpret the ever-changing human social world.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-20T18:57:13Z)
• Do LLMs trust AI regulation? Emerging behaviour of game-theoretic LLM agents [61.132523071109354]
  This paper investigates the interplay between AI developers, regulators and users, modelling their strategic choices under different regulatory scenarios.<n>Our research identifies emerging behaviours of strategic AI agents, which tend to adopt more "pessimistic" stances than pure game-theoretic agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-11T15:41:21Z)
• AI, Pluralism, and (Social) Compensation [1.5442389863546546]
  A strategy in response to pluralistic values in a user population is to personalize an AI system. If the AI can adapt to the specific values of each individual, then we can potentially avoid many of the challenges of pluralism. However, if there is an external measure of success for the human-AI team, then the adaptive AI system may develop strategies to compensate for its human teammate.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-30T04:41:47Z)
• ProAgent: Building Proactive Cooperative Agents with Large Language Models [89.53040828210945]
  ProAgent is a novel framework that harnesses large language models to create proactive agents. ProAgent can analyze the present state, and infer the intentions of teammates from observations. ProAgent exhibits a high degree of modularity and interpretability, making it easily integrated into various coordination scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-22T10:36:56Z)
• The art of compensation: how hybrid teams solve collective risk dilemmas [6.081979963786028]
  We study the evolutionary dynamics of cooperation in a hybrid population made of both adaptive and fixed-behavior agents. We show how the first learn to adapt their behavior to compensate for the behavior of the latter.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-13T13:23:42Z)
• Normative Disagreement as a Challenge for Cooperative AI [56.34005280792013]
  We argue that typical cooperation-inducing learning algorithms fail to cooperate in bargaining problems. We develop a class of norm-adaptive policies and show in experiments that these significantly increase cooperation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-27T11:37:42Z)
• Inducing Equilibria via Incentives: Simultaneous Design-and-Play Finds Global Optima [114.31577038081026]
  We propose an efficient method that tackles the designer's and agents' problems simultaneously in a single loop. Although the designer does not solve the equilibrium problem repeatedly, it can anticipate the overall influence of the incentives on the agents. We prove that the algorithm converges to the global optima at a sublinear rate for a broad class of games.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-04T06:53:59Z)
• The Tragedy of the AI Commons [0.0]
  We use evolutionary game dynamics to model a social dilemma in the context of the ethical development of artificial intelligence. We show how effects can help make cooperation viable in such a scenario. They suggest that coordination for a common good should be attempted in smaller groups in which the cost for cooperation is low, and the perceived risk of failure is high.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-09T12:01:01Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.