the formation of cooperative groups of agents with limited information-processing capabilities to solve complex problems together is a fundamental building principle that cuts through multiple scales in biology from groups of cells to groups of humans. Here, we study an experimental paradigm where a group of humans is joined together to solve a common sensorimotor task that cannot be achieved by a single agent but relies on the cooperation of the group. in particular, each human acts as a neuron-like binary decision-maker that determines in each moment of time whether to be active or not. inspired by the population vector method for movement decoding, each neuron-like decisionmaker is assigned a preferred movement direction that the decision-maker is ignorant about. from the population vector reflecting the group activity, the movement of a cursor is determined, and the task for the group is to steer the cursor into a predefined target. As the preferred movement directions are unknown and players are not allowed to communicate, the group has to learn a control strategy on the fly from the shared visual feedback. Performance is analyzed by learning speed and accuracy, action synchronization, and group coherence. We study four different computational models of the observed behavior, including a perceptron model, a reinforcement learning model, a Bayesian inference model and a Thompson sampling model that efficiently approximates Bayes optimal behavior. The Bayes and especially the thompson model excel in predicting the human group behavior compared to the other models, suggesting that internal models are crucial for adaptive coordination. We discuss benefits and limitations of our paradigm regarding a better understanding of distributed information processing.
The Nash equilibrium concept has previously been shown to be an important tool to understand human sensorimotor interactions, where different actors vie for minimizing their respective effort while engaging in a multi-agent motor task. However, it is not clear how such equilibria are reached. Here, we compare different reinforcement learning models to human behavior engaged in sensorimotor interactions with haptic feedback based on three classic games, including the prisoner’s dilemma, and the symmetric and asymmetric matching pennies games. We find that a discrete analysis that reduces the continuous sensorimotor interaction to binary choices as in classical matrix games does not allow to distinguish between the different learning algorithms, but that a more detailed continuous analysis with continuous formulations of the learning algorithms and the game-theoretic solutions affords different predictions. In particular, we find that Q-learning with intrinsic costs that disfavor deviations from average behavior explains the observed data best, even though all learning algorithms equally converge to admissible Nash equilibrium solutions. We therefore conclude that it is important to study different learning algorithms for understanding sensorimotor interactions, as such behavior cannot be inferred from a game-theoretic analysis alone, that simply focuses on the Nash equilibrium concept, as different learning algorithms impose preferences on the set of possible equilibrium solutions due to the inherent learning dynamics.
The Nash equilibrium is one of the most central solution concepts to study strategic interactions between multiple players and has recently also been shown to capture sensorimotor interactions between players that are haptically coupled. While previous studies in behavioural economics have shown that systematic deviations from Nash equilibria in economic decision-making can be explained by the more general quantal response equilibria, such deviations have not been reported for the sensorimotor domain. Here we investigate haptically coupled dyads across three different sensorimotor games corresponding to the classic symmetric and asymmetric Prisoner's Dilemma, where the quantal response equilibrium predicts characteristic shifts across the three games, although the Nash equilibrium stays the same. We find that subjects exhibit the predicted deviations from the Nash solution. Furthermore, we show that taking into account subjects' priors for the games, we arrive at a more accurate description of bounded rational response equilibria that can be regarded as a quantal response equilibrium with non-uniform prior. Our results suggest that bounded rational response equilibria provide a general tool to explain sensorimotor interactions that include the Nash equilibrium as a special case in the absence of information processing limitations.
The Nash equilibrium concept has previously been shown to be an important tool to understand human sensorimotor interactions, where different actors vie for minimizing their respective effort while engaging in a multi-agent motor task. However, it is not clear how such equilibria are reached. Here, we compare different reinforcement learning models based on haptic feedback to human behavior in sensorimotor versions of three classic games, including the Prisoner's Dilemma, and the symmetric and asymmetric matching pennies games. We find that a discrete analysis that reduces the continuous sensorimotor interaction to binary choices as in classical matrix games does not allow to distinguish between the different learning algorithms, but that a more detailed continuous analysis with continuous formulations of the learning algorithms and the game-theoretic solutions affords different predictions. In particular, we find that Q-learning with intrinsic costs that disfavor deviations from average behavior explains the observed data best, even though all learning algorithms equally converge to admissible Nash equilibrium solutions. We therefore conclude that it is important to study different learning algorithms for understanding sensorimotor interactions, as such behavior cannot be inferred from a game-theoretic analysis alone, that simply focuses on the Nash equilibrium concept, as different learning algorithms impose preferences on the set of possible equilibrium solutions due to the inherent learning dynamics.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.