IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/comaot/v29y2023i3d10.1007_s10588-022-09367-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Approaching (super)human intent recognition in stag hunt with the Naïve Utility Calculus generative model

Author

Listed:
  • Lux Miranda

    (University of Central Florida)

  • Ozlem Ozmen Garibary

    (University of Central Florida)

Abstract

The human ability to utilize social and behavioral cues to infer each other’s intents, infer motivations, and predict future actions is a central process to human social life. This ability represents a facet of human cognition that artificial intelligence has yet to fully mimic and master. Artificial agents with greater social intelligence have wide-ranging applications from enabling the collaboration of human–AI teams to more accurately modelling human behavior in complex systems. Here, we show that the Naïve Utility Calculus generative model is capable of competing with leading models in intent recognition and action prediction when observing stag-hunt, a simple multiplayer game where agents must infer each other’s intentions to maximize rewards. Moreover, we show the model is the first with the capacity to out-compete human observers in intent recognition after the first round of observation. We conclude with a discussion on implications for the Naïve Utility Calculus and of similar generative models in general.

Suggested Citation

  • Lux Miranda & Ozlem Ozmen Garibary, 2023. "Approaching (super)human intent recognition in stag hunt with the Naïve Utility Calculus generative model," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 434-447, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:comaot:v:29:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s10588-022-09367-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s10588-022-09367-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10588-022-09367-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10588-022-09367-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schlüter, Maja & Baeza, Andres & Dressler, Gunnar & Frank, Karin & Groeneveld, Jürgen & Jager, Wander & Janssen, Marco A. & McAllister, Ryan R.J. & Müller, Birgit & Orach, Kirill & Schwarz, Nina & Wij, 2017. "A framework for mapping and comparing behavioural theories in models of social-ecological systems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 21-35.
    2. Chathika Gunaratne & Nisha Baral & William Rand & Ivan Garibay & Chathura Jayalath & Chathurani Senevirathna, 2020. "The effects of information overload on online conversation dynamics," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 255-276, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ulfia A. Lenfers & Julius Weyl & Thomas Clemen, 2018. "Firewood Collection in South Africa: Adaptive Behavior in Social-Ecological Models," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-17, August.
    2. Roopam Shukla & Ankit Agarwal & Kamna Sachdeva & Juergen Kurths & P. K. Joshi, 2019. "Climate change perception: an analysis of climate change and risk perceptions among farmer types of Indian Western Himalayas," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 152(1), pages 103-119, January.
    3. Florian Kotthoff & Thomas Hamacher, 2022. "Calibrating Agent-Based Models of Innovation Diffusion with Gradients," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 25(3), pages 1-4.
    4. Shang, Linmei & Heckelei, Thomas & Gerullis, Maria K. & Börner, Jan & Rasch, Sebastian, 2021. "Adoption and diffusion of digital farming technologies - integrating farm-level evidence and system interaction," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    5. Huber, Robert & Bakker, Martha & Balmann, Alfons & Berger, Thomas & Bithell, Mike & Brown, Calum & Grêt-Regamey, Adrienne & Xiong, Hang & Le, Quang Bao & Mack, Gabriele & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Millingt, 2018. "Representation of decision-making in European agricultural agent-based models," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 143-160.
    6. Noeldeke, Beatrice & Winter, Etti & Ntawuhiganayo, Elisée Bahati, 2022. "Representing human decision-making in agent-based simulation models: Agroforestry adoption in rural Rwanda," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    7. Nicholas R. Magliocca, 2020. "Agent-Based Modeling for Integrating Human Behavior into the Food–Energy–Water Nexus," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-25, December.
    8. Lixin Zhou & Jie Lin & Yanfeng Li & Zhenyu Zhang, 2020. "Innovation Diffusion of Mobile Applications in Social Networks: A Multi-Agent System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-17, April.
    9. Zengqing Wu & Run Peng & Xu Han & Shuyuan Zheng & Yixin Zhang & Chuan Xiao, 2023. "Smart Agent-Based Modeling: On the Use of Large Language Models in Computer Simulations," Papers 2311.06330, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2023.
    10. Attila N Lázár & Helen Adams & W Neil Adger & Robert J Nicholls, 2020. "Modelling household well-being and poverty trajectories: An application to coastal Bangladesh," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-23, September.
    11. Anders Dugstad & Kristine Grimsrud & Gorm Kipperberg & Henrik Lindhjem & Ståle Navrud, 2020. "Scope elasticity and economic significance in discrete choice experiments," Discussion Papers 942, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    12. Robert Huber & Hang Xiong & Kevin Keller & Robert Finger, 2022. "Bridging behavioural factors and standard bio‐economic modelling in an agent‐based modelling framework," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(1), pages 35-63, February.
    13. María Elena Orduña Alegría & Niels Schütze & Samuel C. Zipper, 2020. "A Serious Board Game to Analyze Socio-Ecological Dynamics towards Collaboration in Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-19, June.
    14. Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss & Corbera, Esteve & Lapeyre, Renaud, 2019. "Payments for Environmental Services and Motivation Crowding: Towards a Conceptual Framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 434-443.
    15. Gabriel Lopez Porras & Lindsay C. Stringer & Claire H. Quinn, 2018. "Unravelling Stakeholder Perceptions to Enable Adaptive Water Governance in Dryland Systems," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 32(10), pages 3285-3301, August.
    16. F. LeRon Shults & Wesley J. Wildman, 2020. "Human Simulation and Sustainability: Ontological, Epistemological, and Ethical Reflections," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-16, December.
    17. Johannes Bettin & Meike Wollni, 2020. "Environmental Concern and Urbanization in India: Towards Psychological Complexity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-25, December.
    18. Finger, Robert & Möhring, Niklas, 2022. "The adoption of pesticide-free wheat production and farmers' perceptions of its environmental and health effects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    19. Marine Albert & Jacques-Eric Bergez & Magali Willaume & Stéphane Couture, 2022. "Vulnerability of Maize Farming Systems to Climate Change: Farmers’ Opinions Differ about the Relevance of Adaptation Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-23, July.
    20. Okumah, Murat & Yeboah, Ata Senior & Bonyah, Sylvester Kwaku, 2020. "What matters most? Stakeholders’ perceptions of river water quality," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:comaot:v:29:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s10588-022-09367-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.