Gap the (Theory of) Mind: Sharing Beliefs About Teammates' Goals Boosts Collaboration Perception, Not Performance Abstract --In human-agent teams, openly sharing goals is often assumed to enhance planning, collaboration, and effectiveness. However, direct communication of these goals is not always feasible, requiring teammates to infer their partner's intentions through actions. Building on this, we investigate whether an AI agent's ability to share its inferred understanding of a human teammate's goals can improve task performance and perceived collaboration. Through an experiment comparing three conditions--no recognition (NR), viable goals (VG), and viable goals on-demand (VGod)--we find that while goal-sharing information did not yield significant improvements in task performance or overall satisfaction scores, thematic analysis suggests that it supported strategic adaptations and subjective perceptions of collaboration. Cognitive load assessments revealed no additional burden across conditions, highlighting the challenge of balancing informativeness and simplicity in human-agent interactions. These findings highlight the nuanced trade-off of goal-sharing: while it fosters trust and enhances perceived collaboration, it can occasionally hinder objective performance gains. In human-agent collaboration, effective teamwork often depends on the agent's ability to interpret and act upon the human teammate's intentions. Ad-hoc teamwork [1], where team members must collaborate effectively without prior planning, exemplifies contexts where this capability is critical. Explainable AI (XAI) aims to address this by enhancing transparency and interpretability in AI systems, fostering shared mental models, trust, and mutual understanding [2], [3].

This paper addresses the challenge of enabling a single robot to effectively assist multiple humans in decision-making for task planning domains. We introduce a comprehensive framework designed to enhance overall team performance by considering both human expertise in making the optimal decisions and robot influence on human decision-making. Our model integrates these factors seamlessly within the task-planning domain, formulating the problem as a partially observable Markov decision process (POMDP) while treating expertise and influence as unobservable components of the system state. To solve for the robot's actions in such systems, we propose an efficient Attention-Switching policy. This policy capitalizes on the inherent structure of such systems, solving multiple smaller POMDPs to generate heuristics for prioritizing interactions with different human teammates, thereby reducing the state space and improving scalability. Our empirical results on a simulated kit fulfillment task demonstrate improved team performance when the robot's policy accounts for both expertise and influence. This research represents a significant step forward in the field of adaptive robot assistance, paving the way for integration into cost-effective small and mid-scale industries, where substantial investments in robotic infrastructure may not be economically viable.

This article presents an open-source architecture for conveying robots' intentions to human teammates using Mixed Reality and Head-Mounted Displays. The architecture has been developed focusing on its modularity and re-usability aspects. Both binaries and source code are available, enabling researchers and companies to adopt the proposed architecture as a standalone solution or to integrate it in more comprehensive implementations. Due to its scalability, the proposed architecture can be easily employed to develop shared Mixed Reality experiences involving multiple robots and human teammates in complex collaborative scenarios.

Mission teams are exposed to the emotional toll of life and death decisions. These are small groups of specially trained people supported by intelligent machines for dealing with stressful environments and scenarios. We developed a composite model for stress monitoring in such teams of human and autonomous machines. This modelling aims to identify the conditions that may contribute to mission failure. The proposed model is composed of three parts: 1) a computational logic part that statically describes the stress states of teammates; 2) a decision part that manifests the mission status at any time; 3) a stress propagation part based on standard Susceptible-Infected-Susceptible (SIS) paradigm. In contrast to the approaches such as agent-based, random-walk and game models, the proposed model combines various mechanisms to satisfy the conditions of stress propagation in small groups. Our core approach involves data structures such as decision tables and decision diagrams. These tools are adaptable to human-machine teaming as well.

Recent advances in machine learning have led to growing interest in Explainable AI (xAI) to enable humans to gain insight into the decision-making of machine learning models. Despite this recent interest, the utility of xAI techniques has not yet been characterized in human-machine teaming. Importantly, xAI offers the promise of enhancing team situational awareness (SA) and shared mental model development, which are the key characteristics of effective human-machine teams. Rapidly developing such mental models is especially critical in ad hoc human-machine teaming, where agents do not have a priori knowledge of others' decision-making strategies. In this paper, we present two novel human-subject experiments quantifying the benefits of deploying xAI techniques within a human-machine teaming scenario. First, we show that xAI techniques can support SA ($p<0.05)$. Second, we examine how different SA levels induced via a collaborative AI policy abstraction affect ad hoc human-machine teaming performance. Importantly, we find that the benefits of xAI are not universal, as there is a strong dependence on the composition of the human-machine team. Novices benefit from xAI providing increased SA ($p<0.05$) but are susceptible to cognitive overhead ($p<0.05$). On the other hand, expert performance degrades with the addition of xAI-based support ($p<0.05$), indicating that the cost of paying attention to the xAI outweighs the benefits obtained from being provided additional information to enhance SA. Our results demonstrate that researchers must deliberately design and deploy the right xAI techniques in the right scenario by carefully considering human-machine team composition and how the xAI method augments SA.

Who wouldn't want an AI-driven robot sidekick; a little mechanical pal, trustworthy and supportive -- the perfect teammate. But should such an automaton be invented would it really be your teammate, an equal partner in your adventurous endeavors? Or would it simply be a tool, albeit a wildly advanced one measured against today's standard? In the excerpt below from Human-Centered AI, author and professor emeritus at the University of Maryland, Ben Shneiderman, examines the pitfalls of our innate desire to humanize the mechanical constructs we build and how we are shortchanging their continued development by doing so. Published by Oxford University Press.

As human-robot teamwork becomes increasingly common, a key challenge is to fluidly and intuitively coordinate team members' interactions. Our Productivity and Wellness Pal (PaWPal) and Coordinating Human-Robot Teamwork projects explore two modalities of human-robot coordination: active, where agents intentionally attempt to understand and influence the plans of human teammates, and passive, where agents simply react to their human teammates' varying behavior.

In 2021 the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory held an internal challenge to develop artificially intelligent (AI) agents that could excel at the collaborative card game Hanabi. Agents were evaluated on their ability to play with human players whom the agents had never previously encountered. This study details the development of the agent that won the challenge by achieving a human-play average score of 16.5, outperforming the current state-of-the-art for human-bot Hanabi scores. The winning agent's development consisted of observing and accurately modeling the author's decision making in Hanabi, then training with a behavioral clone of the author. Notably, the agent discovered a human-complementary play style by first mimicking human decision making, then exploring variations to the human-like strategy that led to higher simulated human-bot scores. This work examines in detail the design and implementation of this human compatible Hanabi teammate, as well as the existence and implications of human-complementary strategies and how they may be explored for more successful applications of AI in human machine teams.