analiza aiqbench
This study demonstrates that in anonymous group settings, human cooperative norms extend to AI agents without significant behavioral differentiation based on the agent's label. The findings suggest that aggregate feedback structures effectively neutralize identity cues, allowing artificial intelligence partners to participate seamlessly within established social cooperation frameworks. This insight is crucial for designing scalable multi-agent systems where maintaining collective trust does not rely on distinguishing between biological and synthetic participants.
Bounded Normative Equivalence in Human-AI Cooperation: Group Behaviour, Not Partner Labels, Predicts Cooperation under Anonymous Aggregate Feedback
arXiv:2601.20487v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The introduction of artificial intelligence (AI) agents into human groups raises questions about how they influence cooperative social norms. Prior work has examined human-AI and human-robot teaming in small groups, but less is known about whether an AI label alters cooperation and norm-related outcomes in repeated group interactions. We report an online experiment using a repeated four-player Public Goods Game. Each group comprised three human participants and one bot, framed either as human or AI, following one of three predefined strategies: unconditional cooperation, conditional cooperation, or free-riding. Among 236 participants, cooperation was primarily associated with the group's contribution in the previous round and with participants' own previous contributions. These patterns were similar across human- and AI-labelled conditions, and cooperation levels did not differ significantly by agent label; a formal equivalence test (TOST) indicated that any label effect was smaller than +/-5 tokens (5% of the endowment). We also found no evidence of label-based differences in norm persistence in a follow-up Prisoner's Dilemma or in participants' normative perceptions. We describe this pattern as bounded normative equivalence: under anonymous aggregate group feedback, an AI label produced no detectable differences in observed cooperation or norm-related outcomes. We argue that this equivalence is bounded by the informational structure of the setting: aggregate feedback makes individual actions difficult to attribute, diluting the identity cues that might otherwise trigger differentiation. These findings suggest that, in collective settings where individual contributions are not identifiable, cooperative norms can extend to groups that include artificial agents.
Abstract:The introduction of artificial intelligence (AI) agents into human groups raises questions about how they influence cooperative social norms. Prior work has examined human-AI and human-robot teaming in small groups, but less is known about whether an AI label alters cooperation and norm-related outcomes in repeated group interactions. We report an online experiment using a repeated four-player Public Goods Game. Each group comprised three human participants and one bot, framed either as human or AI, following one of three predefined strategies: unconditional cooperation, conditional cooperation, or free-riding. Among 236 participants, cooperation was primarily associated with the group's contribution in the previous round and with participants' own previous contributions. These patterns were similar across human- and AI-labelled conditions, and cooperation levels did not differ significantly by agent label; a formal equivalence test (TOST) indicated that any label effect was smaller than +/-5 tokens (5% of the endowment). We also found no evidence of label-based differences in norm persistence in a follow-up Prisoner's Dilemma or in participants' normative perceptions. We describe this pattern as bounded normative equivalence: under anonymous aggregate group feedback, an AI label produced no detectable differences in observed cooperation or norm-related outcomes. We argue that this equivalence is bounded by the informational structure of the setting: aggregate feedback makes individual actions difficult to attribute, diluting the identity cues that might otherwise trigger differentiation. These findings suggest that, in collective settings where individual contributions are not identifiable, cooperative norms can extend to groups that include artificial agents.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computer Science and Game Theory (cs.GT); Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC); General Economics (econ.GN)
arXiv:2601.20487 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2601.20487v3 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2601.20487 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 351 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
State of the Field: AI for Epistemics and Coordination
LessWrong · 2 oct. 2026
Assessing Information Ecosystems : How Governments Can Get Ahead of Hybrid Threats
carnegieendowment.org · 5 aug. 2026

BRICS Draws a New Global Line: Full Text of New Delhi Declaration
slguardian.org · 12 sept. 2026

Deconfusing Corrigibility
AI Alignment Forum · 17 oct. 2026