When to (or not to) trust intelligent machines: Insights from an evolutionary game theory analysis of trust in repeated games

The actions of intelligent agents, such as chatbots, recommender systems, and virtual assistants are typically not fully transparent to the user. Consequently, using such an agent involves the user exposing themselves to the risk that the agent may act in a way opposed to the user's goals. It is often argued that people use trust as a cognitive shortcut to reduce the complexity of such interactions. Here we formalise this by using the methods of evolutionary game theory to study the viability of trust-based strategies in repeated games. These are reciprocal strategies that cooperate as long as the other player is observed to be cooperating. Unlike classic reciprocal strategies, once mutual cooperation has been observed for a threshold number of rounds they stop checking their co-player's behaviour every round, and instead only check with some probability. By doing so, they reduce the opportunity cost of verifying whether the action of their co-player was actually cooperative. We demonstrate that these trust-based strategies can outcompete strategies that are always conditional, such as Tit-for-Tat, when the opportunity cost is non-negligible. We argue that this cost is likely to be greater when the interaction is between people and intelligent agents, because of the reduced transparency of the agent. Consequently, we expect people to use trust-based strategies more frequently in interactions with intelligent agents. Our results provide new, important insights into the design of mechanisms for facilitating interactions between humans and intelligent agents, where trust is an essential factor.

[1]  Francisco C. Santos,et al.  Intention recognition promotes the emergence of cooperation , 2011, Adapt. Behav..

[2]  George A. Akerlof The Market for “Lemons”: Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism , 1970 .

[3]  F. C. Santos,et al.  Good Agreements Make Good Friends , 2013, Scientific Reports.

[4]  Sonja Grabner-Kraeuter The Role of Consumers' Trust in Online-Shopping , 2002 .

[5]  M. Nowak,et al.  A strategy of win-stay, lose-shift that outperforms tit-for-tat in the Prisoner's Dilemma game , 1993, Nature.

[6]  Han The Anh,et al.  Intention Recognition, Commitment and Their Roles in the Evolution of Cooperation - From Artificial Intelligence Techniques to Evolutionary Game Theory Models , 2013, Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics.

[7]  John Maynard Smith Honest signalling: the Philip Sidney game , 1991, Animal Behaviour.

[8]  Panagiotis Kanellis,et al.  Trust and relationship building in electronic commerce , 2001, Internet Res..

[9]  David G. Rand,et al.  Evolution of fairness in the one-shot anonymous Ultimatum Game , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[10]  Manh Hong Duong,et al.  On Equilibrium Properties of the Replicator–Mutator Equation in Deterministic and Random Games , 2019, Dynamic Games and Applications.

[11]  P. Dasgupta Trust as a commodity , 1988 .

[12]  Dietmar Jannach,et al.  Interacting with Recommenders—Overview and Research Directions , 2017, ACM Trans. Interact. Intell. Syst..

[13]  W. Hamilton,et al.  The evolution of cooperation. , 1984, Science.

[14]  Samuel Karlin,et al.  A First Course on Stochastic Processes , 1968 .

[15]  Dietmar Jannach,et al.  A systematic review and taxonomy of explanations in decision support and recommender systems , 2017, User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction.

[16]  J M Smith,et al.  Evolution and the theory of games , 1976 .

[17]  Cristiano Castelfranchi,et al.  Modeling Social Action for AI Agents , 1997, IJCAI.

[18]  Luis A. Martinez-Vaquero,et al.  Memory-n strategies of direct reciprocity , 2017, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[19]  Vincent A. Knight,et al.  Using a theory of mind to find best responses to memory-one strategies , 2019, Scientific Reports.

[20]  C. Nass,et al.  Machines and Mindlessness , 2000 .

[21]  D. Fudenberg,et al.  Tit-for-tat or win-stay, lose-shift? , 2007, Journal of theoretical biology.

[22]  K. Sigmund The Calculus of Selfishness , 2010 .

[23]  Ardion Beldad,et al.  The effect of virtual sales agent (VSA) gender - product gender congruence on product advice credibility, trust in VSA and online vendor, and purchase intention , 2016, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[24]  Francisco C. Santos,et al.  The emergence of commitments and cooperation , 2012, AAMAS.

[25]  Jeffrey M. Voas,et al.  “Alexa, Can I Trust You?” , 2017, Computer.

[26]  C. Castelfranchi,et al.  Social Trust : A Cognitive Approach , 2000 .

[27]  Teck-Hua Ho,et al.  Finite automata play repeated prisoner's dilemma with information processing costs , 1996 .

[28]  Arne Traulsen,et al.  The Structure of Mutations and the Evolution of Cooperation , 2012, PloS one.

[29]  Li Chen,et al.  Trust-inspiring explanation interfaces for recommender systems , 2007, Knowl. Based Syst..

[30]  Niki Pissinou,et al.  Game Theoretic Modeling and Evolution of Trust in Autonomous Multi-Hop Networks: Application to Network Security and Privacy , 2011, 2011 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC).

[31]  Eilon Solan,et al.  High frequency repeated games with costly monitoring: High frequency repeated games , 2018 .

[32]  Jürgen te Vrugt,et al.  Intention Recognition , 2006, SmartKom.

[33]  Jorge M. Pacheco,et al.  Evolution of Collective Fairness in Hybrid Populations of Humans and Agents , 2019, AAAI.

[34]  M. Nowak,et al.  Stochastic dynamics of invasion and fixation. , 2006, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[35]  Sarvapali D. Ramchurn,et al.  Trust in multi-agent systems , 2004, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[36]  Francisco C. Santos,et al.  Why Is It So Hard to Say Sorry? Evolution of Apology with Commitments in the iterated Prisoner's Dilemma , 2013, IJCAI.

[37]  Robert Dahlstrom,et al.  How to recover trust in the banking industry? A game theory approach to empirical analyses of bank and corporate customer relationships , 2014 .

[38]  Sarvapali D. Ramchurn,et al.  Trust in Multiagent Systems , 2004 .

[39]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  Introduction to multiagent systems , 2001 .

[40]  N. Luhmann Trust and Power , 1979 .

[41]  Matjaz Perc,et al.  Grand Challenges in Social Physics: In Pursuit of Moral Behavior , 2018, Front. Phys..

[42]  Luís Moniz Pereira,et al.  Apology and forgiveness evolve to resolve failures in cooperative agreements , 2015, Scientific Reports.

[43]  Matjaz Perc,et al.  Lying on networks: The role of structure and topology in promoting honesty , 2020, Physical review. E.

[44]  Juan E. Gilbert,et al.  Virtual agents in retail web sites: Benefits of simulated social interaction for older users , 2012, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[45]  Valerio Capraro,et al.  The evolution of lying in well-mixed populations , 2019, Journal of the Royal Society Interface.

[46]  M. Macy,et al.  Learning dynamics in social dilemmas , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[47]  C. Hauert,et al.  Via Freedom to Coercion: The Emergence of Costly Punishment , 2007, Science.

[48]  Drew Fudenberg,et al.  The Folk Theorem in Repeated Games with Discounting or with Incomplete Information , 1986 .

[49]  Dídac Busquets,et al.  Experiments with Social Capital in Multi-agent Systems , 2014, PRIMA.

[50]  Francisco C. Santos,et al.  Engineering Pro-Sociality With Autonomous Agents , 2018, AAAI.

[51]  Peter R. Lewis,et al.  Trusting Intelligent Machines: Deepening Trust Within Socio-Technical Systems , 2018, IEEE Technology and Society Magazine.

[52]  Marco A. Janssen,et al.  Evolution of cooperation in a one-shot Prisoner's , 2008 .

[53]  Kyung Hyan Yoo,et al.  Persuasive Recommender Systems - Conceptual Background and Implications , 2012, Springer Briefs in Electrical and Computer Engineering.

[54]  Arne Traulsen,et al.  Exploration dynamics in evolutionary games , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[55]  Gregory Lewis Asymmetric Information, Adverse Selection and Online Disclosure: The Case of eBay Motors , 2011 .

[56]  Joyce E. Berg,et al.  Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History , 1995 .

[57]  Julián García,et al.  No Strategy Can Win in the Repeated Prisoner's Dilemma: Linking Game Theory and Computer Simulations , 2018, Front. Robot. AI.

[58]  Valerio Capraro,et al.  The evolution of trust and trustworthiness , 2020, Journal of the Royal Society Interface.

[59]  Yoav Shoham,et al.  Computer science and game theory , 2008, CACM.

[60]  B. Mahadevan Business Models for Internet-Based E-Commerce: An Anatomy , 2000 .

[61]  Luke McNally,et al.  Cooperation and the evolution of intelligence , 2012, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[62]  Simon T. Powers,et al.  A mechanism to promote social behaviour in household load balancing , 2020, ALIFE.

[63]  F. C. Santos,et al.  Evolutionary dynamics of social dilemmas in structured heterogeneous populations. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[64]  Alasdair I. Houston,et al.  Evolution of trust and trustworthiness: social awareness favours personality differences , 2008, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[65]  D. Fudenberg,et al.  Evolutionary cycles of cooperation and defection. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[66]  Rino Falcone,et al.  Trust Theory: A Socio-Cognitive and Computational Model , 2010 .

[67]  H. Kulmala,et al.  Cooperative strategies in customer–supplier relationships: The role of interfirm trust , 2009 .