Cooperation between self-interested individuals is a widespread phenomenon in the natural world, but remains elusive in interactions between artificially intelligent agents.

Groups of humans are often able to find ways to cooperate with one another in complex, temporally extended social dilemmas. Models based on behavioral economics are only able to explain this phenomenon for unrealistic stateless matrix games. Recently, multi-agent reinforcement learning has been applied to generalize social dilemma problems to temporally and spatially extended Markov games. However, this has not yet generated an agent that learns to cooperate in social dilemmas as humans do. A key insight is that many, but not all, human individuals have inequity averse social preferences. This promotes a particular resolution of the matrix game social dilemma wherein inequity-averse individuals are personally pro-social and punish defectors. Here we extend this idea to Markov games and show that it promotes cooperation in several types of sequential social dilemma, via a profitable interaction with policy learnability. In particular, we find that inequity aversion improves temporal credit assignment for the important class of intertemporal social dilemmas. These results help explain how large-scale cooperation may emerge and persist.

Multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL) has shown recent success in increasingly complex fixed-team zero-sum environments. However, the real world is not zero-sum nor does it have fixed teams; humans face numerous social dilemmas and must learn when to cooperate and when to compete. To successfully deploy agents into the human world, it may be important that they be able to understand and help in our conflicts. Unfortunately, selfish MARL agents typically fail when faced with social dilemmas. In this work, we show evidence of emergent direct reciprocity, indirect reciprocity and reputation, and team formation when training agents with randomized uncertain social preferences (RUSP), a novel environment augmentation that expands the distribution of environments agents play in. RUSP is generic and scalable; it can be applied to any multi-agent environment without changing the original underlying game dynamics or objectives. In particular, we show that with RUSP these behaviors can emerge and lead to higher social welfare equilibria in both classic abstract social dilemmas like Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma as well in more complex intertemporal environments.

Characterizing and understanding lane-changing behavior in the presence of automated vehicles (AVs) is crucial to ensuring safety and efficiency in mixed traffic. Accordingly, this study aims to characterize the interactions between the lane-changing vehicle (active vehicle) and the vehicle directly impacted by the maneuver in the target lane (passive vehicle). Utilizing real-world trajectory data from the Waymo Open Motion Dataset (WOMD), this study explores patterns in lane-changing behavior and provides insight into how these behaviors evolve under different AV market penetration rates (MPRs). In particular, we propose a game-theoretic framework to analyze cooperative and defective behaviors in mixed traffic, applied to the 7,636 observed lane-changing events in the WOMD. First, we utilize k-means clustering to classify vehicles as cooperative or defective, revealing that the proportions of cooperative AVs are higher than those of HDVs in both active and passive roles. Next, we jointly estimate the utilities of active and passive vehicles to model their behaviors using the quantal response equilibrium framework. Empirical payoff tables are then constructed based on these utilities. Using these payoffs, we analyze the presence of social dilemmas and examine the evolution of cooperative behaviors using evolutionary game theory. Our results reveal the presence of social dilemmas in approximately 4% and 11% of lane-changing events for active and passive vehicles, respectively, with most classified as Stag Hunt or Prisoner's Dilemma (Chicken Game rarely observed). Moreover, the Monte Carlo simulation results show that repeated lane-changing interactions consistently lead to increased cooperative behavior over time, regardless of the AV penetration rate.

As agentic AI becomes more widespread, agents with distinct and possibly conflicting goals will interact in complex ways. These multi-agent interactions pose a fundamental challenge, particularly in social dilemmas, where agents' individual incentives can undermine collective welfare. While reinforcement learning (RL) has been effective for aligning large language models (LLMs) in the single-agent regime, prior small-network results suggest that standard RL in multi-agent settings often converges to defecting, self-interested policies. We show the same effect in LLMs: despite cooperative priors, RL-trained LLM agents develop opportunistic behavior that can exploit even advanced closed-source models. To address this tendency of RL to converge to poor equilibria, we adapt a recent opponent-learning awareness algorithm, Advantage Alignment, to fine-tune LLMs toward multi-agent cooperation and non-exploitability. We then introduce a group-relative baseline that simplifies advantage computation in iterated games, enabling multi-agent training at LLM scale. We also contribute a novel social dilemma environment, Trust-and-Split, which requires natural language communication to achieve high collective welfare. Across a wide range of social dilemmas, policies learned with Advantage Alignment achieve higher collective payoffs while remaining robust against exploitation by greedy agents. We release all of our code to support future work on multi-agent RL training for LLMs. LLMs undergo large-scale pretraining, instruction tuning, and reinforcement learning, and continue to exhibit increasingly advanced capabilities (Guo et al., 2025). Coupled with decreasing deployment costs and improved adaptability to downstream tasks, these trends enhance the commercial and practical viability of LLM agents across a wide range of applications.

Groups of humans are often able to find ways to cooperate with one another in complex, temporally extended social dilemmas. Models based on behavioral economics are only able to explain this phenomenon for unrealistic stateless matrix games. Recently, multi-agent reinforcement learning has been applied to generalize social dilemma problems to temporally and spatially extended Markov games. However, this has not yet generated an agent that learns to cooperate in social dilemmas as humans do. A key insight is that many, but not all, human individuals have inequity averse social preferences. This promotes a particular resolution of the matrix game social dilemma wherein inequity-averse individuals are personally pro-social and punish defectors. Here we extend this idea to Markov games and show that it promotes cooperation in several types of sequential social dilemma, via a profitable interaction with policy learnability. In particular, we find that inequity aversion improves temporal credit assignment for the important class of intertemporal social dilemmas. These results help explain how large-scale cooperation may emerge and persist.

Groups of humans are often able to find ways to cooperate with one another in complex, temporally extended social dilemmas.

Real-world multi-agent scenarios often involve mixed motives, demanding altruistic agents capable of self-protection against potential exploitation.

This approach seeks to modify other agents'

Neural Information Processing Systems http://nips.cc/