Counterfactual Reasoning for Causal Responsibility Attribution in Probabilistic Multi-Agent Systems

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.13077v1
• Date: Wed, 13 May 2026 06:50:04 GMT
• Title: Counterfactual Reasoning for Causal Responsibility Attribution in Probabilistic Multi-Agent Systems
• Abstract summary: Responsibility allocation is a fundamental challenge in the design and analysis of multi-agent systems.<n>We introduce a notion of retrospective (backward) counterfactual responsibility, which quantifies an agent's accountability for outcomes.<n>We propose a formal framework that supports both verification and strategic reasoning in responsibility-aware multi-agent systems.
• Score: 4.189643331553923
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Responsibility allocation -- determining the extent to which agents are accountable for outcomes -- is a fundamental challenge in the design and analysis of multi-agent systems. In this work, we model such systems as concurrent stochastic multi-player games and introduce a notion of retrospective (backward) counterfactual responsibility, which quantifies an agent's accountability for outcomes resulting from a given strategy profile. To allocate responsibility among agents, we utilise the Shapley value and formally show that this method satisfies key desirable properties, including fairness and consistency. Building on this foundation, we propose a formal framework that supports both verification and strategic reasoning in responsibility-aware multi-agent systems. Furthermore, by adopting Nash equilibrium as the solution concept, we demonstrate how to compute stable strategy profiles in which agents trade off responsibility against expected reward.

Related papers

• Enhancing Decision-Making with Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Fictitious Play [53.56274149236814]
  Multi-Agent Fictitious Play (MAFP) is a novel MAS paradigm that represents stakeholder stances as agents.<n>MAFP iteratively updates each agent's decision by best responding to the empirical mixture of other agents' past decisions.<n>We evaluate MAFP on challenging decision-making tasks that test the capability of deciding strategies for competitive scenarios prior to acting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-17T17:31:06Z)
• Towards trustworthy agentic AI: a comprehensive survey of safety, robustness, privacy, and system security [57.35851886874902]
  Agentic AI systems execute complex tasks autonomously, but their multi-step trajectories introduce new failure modes that challenge trustworthiness.<n>This survey provides a focused examination of trustworthy agentic AI through two core dimensions that are critical for high-risk deployments.<n>For each dimension, we clarify key concepts, identify where risks emerge along the agent workflow, and summarize stage-targeted mitigation strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-17T10:26:37Z)
• Position: agentic AI orchestration should be Bayes-consistent [92.04373485710285]
  This paper argues that coherent decision-making requires Bayesian principles at the orchestration level of the agentic system.<n>It provides examples and design patterns to illustrate how beliefs and utility-aware policies can improve agentic AI orchestration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-01T15:43:43Z)
• SAVOIR: Learning Social Savoir-Faire via Shapley-based Reward Attribution [82.31558282651811]
  Social intelligence, the ability to navigate complex interpersonal interactions, presents a fundamental challenge for language agents.<n>Existing approaches directly employ language models to distribute episode-level rewards, yielding attributions that are retrospective and lack theoretical grounding.<n>We propose SAVOIR, a novel principled framework grounded in cooperative game theory.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-21T02:08:25Z)
• ChatShopBuddy: Towards Reliable Conversational Shopping Agents via Reinforcement Learning [88.87305027895657]
  This work investigates Reinforcement Learning-based optimization for shopping agents in real-world scenarios.<n>Agents must simultaneously satisfy multiple interdependent objectives spanning objective metrics (product correctness), subjective qualities (persuasiveness), outcome rewards (final response quality), and process rewards (tool efficiency)<n>Experiments demonstrate that our RL-trained agent, ChatShopBuddy, consistently outperforms larger models relying on generic reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-06T09:18:51Z)
• Causal Responsibility Attribution for Human-AI Collaboration [62.474732677086855]
  This paper presents a causal framework using Structural Causal Models (SCMs) to systematically attribute responsibility in human-AI systems. Two case studies illustrate the framework's adaptability in diverse human-AI collaboration scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-05T17:17:45Z)
• Responsibility-aware Strategic Reasoning in Probabilistic Multi-Agent Systems [1.7819574476785418]
  Responsibility plays a key role in the development and deployment of trustworthy autonomous systems.<n>We introduce the logic PATL+R, a variant of Probabilistic Alternating-time Temporal Logic.<n>We present an approach to synthesise joint strategies that satisfy an outcome specified in PATL+R.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-31T18:49:12Z)
• Measuring Responsibility in Multi-Agent Systems [1.5883812630616518]
  We introduce a family of quantitative measures of responsibility in multi-agent planning. We ascribe responsibility to agents for a given outcome by linking probabilities between behaviours and responsibility through three metrics. An entropy-based measurement of responsibility is the first to capture the causal responsibility properties of outcomes over time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-31T18:45:34Z)
• Responsibility in a Multi-Value Strategic Setting [12.143925288392166]
  Responsibility is a key notion in multi-agent systems and in creating safe, reliable and ethical AI. We present a model for responsibility attribution in a multi-agent, multi-value setting. We show how considerations of responsibility can help an agent to select strategies that are in line with its values.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-22T17:51:13Z)
• Agent-Oriented Planning in Multi-Agent Systems [54.429028104022066]
  We propose AOP, a novel framework for agent-oriented planning in multi-agent systems.<n>In this study, we identify three critical design principles of agent-oriented planning, including solvability, completeness, and non-redundancy.<n> Extensive experiments demonstrate the advancement of AOP in solving real-world problems compared to both single-agent systems and existing planning strategies for multi-agent systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-03T04:07:51Z)
• Anticipating Responsibility in Multiagent Planning [9.686474898346392]
  Responsibility anticipation is a process of determining if the actions of an individual agent may cause it to be responsible for a particular outcome. This can be used in a multi-agent planning setting to allow agents to anticipate responsibility in the plans they consider.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-31T13:58:49Z)
• On Blame Attribution for Accountable Multi-Agent Sequential Decision Making [29.431349181232203]
  We study blame attribution in the context of cooperative multi-agent sequential decision making. We show that some of the well known blame attribution methods, such as Shapley value, are not performance-incentivizing. We introduce a novel blame attribution method, unique in the set of properties it satisfies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-26T02:22:23Z)

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.