We study the problem of learning from group comparisons, with applications in predicting outcomes of sports and online games. Most of the previous works in this area focus on learning individual effects---they assume each player has an underlying score, and the ''ability'' of the team is modeled by the sum of team members' scores. Therefore, all the current approaches cannot model deeper interaction between team members: some players perform much better if they play together, and some players perform poorly together. In this paper, we propose a new model that takes the player-interaction effects into consideration. However, under certain circumstances, the total number of individuals can be very large, and number of player interactions grows quadratically, which makes learning intractable. In this case, we propose a latent factor model, and show that the sample complexity of our model is bounded under mild assumptions. Finally, we show that our proposed models have much better prediction power on several E-sports datasets, and furthermore can be used to reveal interesting patterns that cannot be discovered by previous methods.

Team-Nash equilibrium (TNE) predicts the outcomes of such coordinated interactions.

Recent milestones in equilibrium computation, such as the success of Libratus, show that it is possible to compute strong solutions to two-player zero-sum games in theory and practice. This is not the case for games with more than two players, which remain one of the main open challenges in computational game theory. This paper focuses on zero-sum games where a team of players faces an opponent, as is the case, for example, in Bridge, collusion in poker, and many non-recreational applications such as war, where the colluders do not have time or means of communicating during battle, collusion in bidding, where communication during the auction is illegal, and coordinated swindling in public. The possibility for the team members to communicate before game play--that is, coordinate their strategies ex ante--makes the use of behavioral strategies unsatisfactory. The reasons for this are closely related to the fact that the team can be represented as a single player with imperfect recall. We propose a new game representation, the realization form, that generalizes the sequence form but can also be applied to imperfect-recall games. Then, we use it to derive an auxiliary game that is equivalent to the original one. It provides a sound way to map the problem of finding an optimal ex-antecoordinated strategy for the team to the well-understood Nash equilibrium-finding problem in a (larger) two-player zero-sum perfect-recall game. By reasoning over the auxiliary game, we devise an anytime algorithm, fictitious team-play, that is guaranteed to converge to an optimal coordinated strategy for the team against an optimal opponent, and that is dramatically faster than the prior state-of-the-art algorithm for this problem.

In many multi-agent settings, participants can form teams to achieve collective outcomes that may far surpass their individual capabilities. Measuring the relative contributions of agents and allocating them shares of the reward that promote long-lasting cooperation are difficult tasks. Cooperative game theory offers solution concepts identifying distribution schemes, such as the Shapley value, that fairly reflect the contribution of individuals to the performance of the team or the Core, which reduces the incentive of agents to abandon their team. Applications of such methods include identifying influential features and sharing the costs of joint ventures or team formation. Unfortunately, using these solutions requires tackling a computational barrier as they are hard to compute, even in restricted settings. In this work, we show how cooperative game-theoretic solutions can be distilled into a learned model by training neural networks to propose fair and stable payoff allocations. We show that our approach creates models that can generalize to games far from the training distribution and can predict solutions for more players than observed during training. An important application of our framework is Explainable AI: our approach can be used to speed-up Shapley value computations on many instances.

We study the problem of learning from group comparisons, with applications in predicting outcomes of sports and online games. Most of the previous works in this area focus on learning individual effects---they assume each player has an underlying score, and the ''ability'' of the team is modeled by the sum of team members' scores. Therefore, all the current approaches cannot model deeper interaction between team members: some players perform much better if they play together, and some players perform poorly together. In this paper, we propose a new model that takes the player-interaction effects into consideration. However, under certain circumstances, the total number of individuals can be very large, and number of player interactions grows quadratically, which makes learning intractable. In this case, we propose a latent factor model, and show that the sample complexity of our model is bounded under mild assumptions. Finally, we show that our proposed models have much better prediction power on several E-sports datasets, and furthermore can be used to reveal interesting patterns that cannot be discovered by previous methods.

The equitable assessment of individual contribution in teams remains a persistent challenge, where conflict and disparity in workload can result in unfair performance evaluation, often requiring manual intervention - a costly and challenging process. We survey existing tool features and identify a gap in conflict resolution methods and AI integration. To address this, we propose a framework and implementation design for a novel AI-enhanced tool that assists in dispute investigation. The framework organises heterogeneous artefacts - submissions (code, text, media), communications (chat, email), coordination records (meeting logs, tasks), peer assessments, and contextual information - into three dimensions with nine benchmarks: Contribution, Interaction, and Role. Objective measures are normalised, aggregated per dimension, and paired with inequality measures (Gini index) to surface conflict markers. A Large Language Model (LLM) architecture performs validated and contextual analysis over these measures to generate interpretable and transparent advisory judgments. We argue for feasibility under current statutory and institutional policy, and outline practical analytics (sentimental, task fidelity, word/line count, etc.), bias safeguards, limitations, and practical challenges.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly being integrated into software development processes, with the potential to transform team workflows and productivity. This paper investigates how LLMs affect team collaboration throughout the Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC). We reframe and update a prior study with recent developments as of 2025, incorporating new literature and case studies. We outline the problem of collaboration hurdles in SDLC and explore how LLMs can enhance productivity, communication, and decision-making in a team context. Through literature review, industry examples, a team survey, and two case studies, we assess the impact of LLM-assisted tools (such as code generation assistants and AI-powered project management agents) on collaborative software engineering practices. Our findings indicate that LLMs can significantly improve efficiency (by automating repetitive tasks and documentation), enhance communication clarity, and aid cross-functional collaboration, while also introducing new challenges like model limitations and privacy concerns. We discuss these benefits and challenges, present research questions guiding the investigation, evaluate threats to validity, and suggest future research directions including domain-specific model customization, improved integration into development tools, and robust strategies for ensuring trust and security.

Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) with Large Language Model (LLM)-powered agents are gaining attention, yet fewer studies explore their team dynamics. Inspired by human team science, we propose a multi-agent framework to examine core aspects of team science: structure, diversity, and interaction dynamics. We evaluate team performance across four tasks: CommonsenseQA, StrategyQA, Social IQa, and Latent Implicit Hate, spanning commonsense and social reasoning. Our results show that flat teams tend to perform better than hierarchical ones, while diversity has a nuanced impact. Interviews suggest agents are overconfident about their team performance, yet post-task reflections reveal both appreciation for collaboration and challenges in integration, including limited conversational coordination.

Observing surgical practice has historically relied on fixed vantage points or recollections, leaving the egocentric visual perspectives that guide clinical decisions undocumented. Fixed-camera video can capture surgical workflows at the room-scale, but cannot reconstruct what each team member actually saw. Thus, these videos only provide limited insights into how decisions that affect surgical safety, training, and workflow optimization are made. Here we introduce EgoSurg, the first framework to reconstruct the dynamic, egocentric replays for any operating room (OR) staff directly from wall-mounted fixed-camera video, and thus, without intervention to clinical workflow. EgoSurg couples geometry-driven neural rendering with diffusion-based view enhancement, enabling high-visual fidelity synthesis of arbitrary and egocentric viewpoints at any moment. In evaluation across multi-site surgical cases and controlled studies, EgoSurg reconstructs person-specific visual fields and arbitrary viewpoints with high visual quality and fidelity. By transforming existing OR camera infrastructure into a navigable dynamic 3D record, EgoSurg establishes a new foundation for immersive surgical data science, enabling surgical practice to be visualized, experienced, and analyzed from every angle.