Papers › Emergent Reciprocity and Team Formation from Randomized Uncertain Social Preferences
Emergent Reciprocity and Team Formation from Randomized Uncertain Social Preferences
Bowen Baker
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.
In Syntology View this paper on Syntology: its repositories, every harvested function with whether it ran, its licence and the call to fetch it.
Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections