Quantum-Like Interdependence Theory Advances Autonomous Human–Machine Teams (A-HMTs)

As humanity grapples with the concept of autonomy for human-machine teams (A-HMTs), unresolved is the necessity for the control of autonomy that instills trust. For non-autonomous systems in states with a high degree of certainty, rational approaches exist to solve, model or control stable interactions; e.g., game theory, scale-free network theory, multi-agent systems, drone swarms. As an example, guided by artificial intelligence (AI, including machine learning, ML) or by human operators, swarms of drones have made spectacular gains in applications too numerous to list (e.g., crop management; mapping, surveillance and fire-fighting systems; weapon systems). But under states of uncertainty or where conflict exists, rational models fail, exactly where interdependence theory thrives. Large, coupled physical or information systems can also experience synergism or dysergism from interdependence. Synergistically, the best human teams are not only highly interdependent, but they also exploit interdependence to reduce uncertainty, the focus of this work-in-progress and roadmap. We have long argued that interdependence is fundamental to human autonomy in teams. But for A-HMTs, no mathematics exists to build from rational theory or social science for their design nor safe or effective operation, a severe weakness. Compared to the rational and traditional social theory, we hope to advance interdependence theory first by mapping similarities between quantum theory and our prior findings; e.g., to maintain interdependence, we previously established that boundaries reduce dysergic effects to allow teams to function (akin to blocking interference to prevent quantum decoherence). Second, we extend our prior findings with case studies to predict with interdependence theory that as uncertainty increases in non-factorable situations for humans, the duality in two-sided beliefs serves debaters who explore alternatives with tradeoffs in the search for the best path going forward. Third, applied to autonomous teams, we conclude that a machine in an A-HMT must be able to express itself to its human teammates in causal language however imperfectly.

[1]  Donald A. Sofge,et al.  Artificial intelligence, Autonomy, and Human-Machine Teams - Interdependence, Context, and Explainable AI , 2019, AI Mag..

[2]  J. Whitton,et al.  Public consent for the geologic disposal of highly radioactive wastes and spent nuclear fuel , 2014 .

[3]  E. Schrödinger Discussion of Probability Relations between Separated Systems , 1935, Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[4]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Control Principles of Complex Networks , 2015, ArXiv.

[5]  A. Einstein Über einen die Erzeugung und Verwandlung des Lichtes betreffenden heuristischen Gesichtspunkt [AdP 17, 132 (1905)] , 2005, Annalen der Physik.

[6]  James Jaccard,et al.  Strong claims and weak evidence: reassessing the predictive validity of the IAT. , 2009, The Journal of applied psychology.

[7]  M. Macy,et al.  Complex Contagions and the Weakness of Long Ties1 , 2007, American Journal of Sociology.

[8]  A D Wissner-Gross,et al.  Causal entropic forces. , 2013, Physical review letters.

[9]  Aaron Vose,et al.  The dynamics of Machiavellian intelligence , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[10]  Kathleen D. Vohs,et al.  Exploding the Self-Esteem Myth , 2005 .

[11]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  Human-centered design considered harmful , 2005, INTR.

[12]  Chao Wang,et al.  Quantum machine learning with D-wave quantum computer , 2019, Quantum Eng..

[13]  Roger C. Conant,et al.  Laws of Information which Govern Systems , 1976, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[14]  W. Lawless The entangled nature of interdependence. Bistability, irreproducibility and uncertainty , 2017 .

[15]  Gentian Buzi,et al.  Glycolytic Oscillations and Limits on Robust Efficiency , 2011, Science.

[16]  Ram Rivlin Fairness in Allocations of Parental Responsibilities, and the Limits of Law , 2020, Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence.

[17]  Albert Einstein,et al.  Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete? , 1935 .

[18]  W. F. Lawless,et al.  The Interdependence of Autonomous Human-Machine Teams: The Entropy of Teams, But Not Individuals, Advances Science , 2019, Entropy.

[19]  William F. Lawless,et al.  The Physics of Teams: Interdependence, Measurable Entropy, and Computational Emotion , 2017, Front. Phys..

[20]  Division on Earth,et al.  Reproducibility and Replicability in Science , 2019 .

[21]  Richard P Mann Collective decision making by rational individuals , 2018, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[22]  Yao Zhang,et al.  Recent advances in quantum machine learning , 2020, Quantum Eng..

[23]  W. Lawless Towards an Epistemology of Interdependence Among the Orthogonal Roles in Human–Machine Teams , 2019, Foundations of Science.

[24]  Tiffany M. Bisbey,et al.  Teams of psychologists helping teams: The evolution of the science of team training. , 2019, The American psychologist.

[25]  Don Sofge,et al.  AI Bookie Will a Self-Authorizing AI-Based System Take Control from a Human Operator? , 2019, AI Mag..

[26]  Junsheng Li,et al.  Streamlining China's protected areas. , 2016, Science.

[27]  Song-Chun Zhu,et al.  A tale of two explanations: Enhancing human trust by explaining robot behavior , 2019, Science Robotics.

[28]  M. Schuman,et al.  Information arms race explains plant-herbivore chemical communication in ecological communities , 2020, Science.

[29]  William K. Wootters,et al.  The no-cloning theorem , 2009 .

[30]  Leonid M. Martyushev,et al.  Entropy and Entropy Production: Old Misconceptions and New Breakthroughs , 2013, Entropy.