Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Social decision-making in a large-scale MultiAgent system considering the influence of empathy

  • Published:
Applied Intelligence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

E mpathy is the ability to spontaneously or purposefully place oneself in another’s situation. Under the continuous effect of empathy, an individual’s preference for things will inevitably be affected by the local and non-local social environment. Inspired by neuropsychology, this paper constructs an extended empathy model to compensate for the shortcomings of previous models in describing the global preference (utility) coupling between individuals, and analyzes how to make efficient decisions based on this model in a large-scale multiagent system. Empathy is abstracted as a random experience process in the form of nonstationary Markov chains, and empathetic utility is defined as the expectation of preference experienced under the corresponding transition probability distribution. By structurally introducing the self-other separation mechanism and energy attenuation mechanism, the model can exhibit social attributes, including absorbency, inhibition, and anisotropy. An extended iterative candidate elimination (EICE) algorithm is designed for the decision problem defined by the proposed model. This algorithm correlates the error upper bound of the objective function with that of the empathy utility to perform the iterative estimation of the candidate strategies. For a polynomial objective function, the EICE under affective empathy can reduce the algorithm complexity from \(O\left (n^{x}\right )\) to \(O\left (n^{y}\right )\) (1 ≤ y ≤ 2 ≤ x ≤ 3). In terms of application prospects, the model and the corresponding decision algorithm are proved to be not only suitable for human society but also able to match the engineering application scenarios such as human-machine interaction and unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) formation under specific requirements.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability Statement

The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Kleiman-Weiner M (2018) Computational foundations of human social intelligence. Phd thesis Massachusetts Institute of Technology

  2. Sanfey AG (2007) Social decision-making: insights from game theory and neuroscience. Science 318(5850):598–602

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ruff CC, Fehr E (2014) The neurobiology of rewards and values in social decision making. Nat Rev Neurosci 15(8):549–562

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Juhl J, Wildschut T, Sedikides C, Diebel T, Cheung W-Y, Ad JJM Vingerhoets (2020) Nostalgia proneness and empathy: Generality, underlying mechanism, and implications for prosocial behavior. J Pers 88(3):485–500

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Stegmann S, Roberge MÉ, van Dick R (2012) Getting tuned in to those who are different: The role of empathy as mediator between diversity and performance. In: Managing Diversity in Organizations. Springer, pp 19–44

  6. Sorensen NA (2010) The road to empathy: Dialogic pathways for engaging diversity and improving intergroup relations University of Michigan

  7. Fowler Z, Law KF, Gaesser B (2021) Against empathy bias: the moral value of equitable empathy. Psychol Sci 32(5):766–779

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. De Coster L, Wiersema JR, Deschrijver E, Brass M (2018) The effect of being imitated on empathy for pain in adults with high-functioning autism: Disturbed self–other distinction leads to altered empathic responding. Autism 22(6):712–727

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Brewer R, Cook R, Cardi V, Treasure J, Catmur C, Bird G (2019) Alexithymia explains increased empathic personal distress in individuals with and without eating disorders. Q J Exp Psychol 72(7):1827–1836

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bukowski H, Tik M, Silani G, Ruff CC, Windischberger C, Lamm C (2020) When differences matter: rtms/fmri reveals how differences in dispositional empathy translate to distinct neural underpinnings of self-other distinction in empathy. Cortex 128:143–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Yang H-X, Hu HX, Zhang Y-J, Yi W, Lui SSY, Chan RCK (2021) A network analysis of interoception, self-awareness, empathy, alexithymia, and autistic traits. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, p 1–11

  12. Rosenblatt J (2019) Symmetry, entropy, diversity and (why not?) quantum statistics in society. Entropy 21(2):144

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Chen J, Zhang D, Qu Z, Wang C (2020) Artificial empathy: A new perspective for analyzing and designing multi-agent systems, vol 8

  14. Zhang C, Li X, Hao J, Chen S, Tuyls K, Xue W, Feng Z (2019) Sa-iga: a multiagent reinforcement learning method towards socially optimal outcomes. Auton Agent Multi-Agent Syst 33(4):403–429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kleiman-Weiner M, Saxe R, Tenenbaum JB (2017) Learning a commonsense moral theory. Cognition 167:107–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Salehi-Abari A, Boutilier C, Larson K (2019) Empathetic decision making in social networks. Artif Intell 275:174–203

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Levine DK (1998) Modeling altruism and spitefulness in experiments. Review of economic dynamics 1(3):593–622

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Sethi R, Somanathan E (2001) Preference evolution and reciprocity. J Econ Theory 97 (2):273–297

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Martinez-Vaquero LA, Han TA, Pereira LM (2015) Apology and forgiveness evolve to resolve failures in cooperative agreements. Sci Rep 5(1):1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hughes E, Leibo JZ, Phillips M, Tuyls K, Duenez-Guzman E, Garcia Castaneda A, Dunning I, Zhu T, McKee K, Koster R et al (2018) Inequity aversion improves cooperation in intertemporal social dilemmas. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst 31(NIPS 2018):31

    Google Scholar 

  21. Peysakhovich A, Lerer A (2018) Prosocial learning agents solve generalized stag hunts better than selfish ones. In: Proceedings of the 17th International conference on autonomous agents and MultiAgent systems, pp 2043–2044

  22. James J, Watson CI, MacDonald B (2018) Artificial empathy in social robots: An analysis of emotions in speech. In: 2018 27th IEEE International symposium on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN). IEEE, pp 632–637

  23. Buono P, Castellano G, De Carolis B, Macchiarulo N (2020) Social assistive robots in elderly care: Exploring the role of empathy. In: EMPATHY@ AVI, pp 12–19

  24. Rogers CR (1975) Empathic: An unappreciated way of being. Couns Psychol 5(2):2–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Batson CD, Batson JG, Slingsby JK, Harrell KL, Peekna HM, Todd RM (1991) Empathic joy and the empathy-altruism hypothesis. J Pers Soc Psychol 61(3):413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Cialdini RB, Brown SL, Lewis BP, Luce C, Neuberg SL (1997) Reinterpreting the empathy–altruism relationship: When one into one equals oneness. J Pers Soc Psychol 73(3):481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Molenberghs P, Cunnington R, Mattingley JB (2012) Brain regions with mirror properties: a meta-analysis of 125 human fmri studies. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 36(1):341–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Ferrari PF, Coudé G (2018) Mirror neurons, embodied emotions, and empathy. In: Neuronal correlates of empathy. Elsevier, pp 67–77

  29. Walter H (2012) Social cognitive neuroscience of empathy: concepts, circuits, and genes. Emot Rev 4(1):9–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Frith CD, Singer T (2008) The role of social cognition in decision making. Philos Trans R Soc: B, Biol Sci 363(1511):3875–3886

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Stephan A (2015) Empathy for artificial agents. Int J Soc Robot 7(1):111–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Rossi PG, Fedeli L (2015) Empathy, education and ai. Int J Soc Robot 7(1):103–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. De Carolis B, Ferilli S, Palestra G (2017) Simulating empathic behavior in a social assistive robot. Multimed Tools Appl 76(4):5073–5094

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Chen J, Zuo Y, Zhang D, Qu Z, Wang C (2019) Promoting constructive interaction and moral behaviors using adaptive empathetic learning. In: International conference on intelligent robotics and applications. Springer, pp 3–14

  35. Saxe Rebecca, Wexler Anna (2005) Making sense of another mind: the role of the right temporo-parietal junction. Neuropsychologia 43(10):1391–1399

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Decety J, Lamm C (2007) The role of the right temporoparietal junction in social interaction: how low-level computational processes contribute to meta-cognition. Neuroscientist 13(6):580–593

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Lamm C, Bukowski H, Silani G (2016) From shared to distinct self–other representations in empathy: evidence from neurotypical function and socio-cognitive disorders. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 371(1686):20150083

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. FeldmanHall O, Dalgleish T, Mobbs D (2013) Alexithymia decreases altruism in real social decisions. Cortex 49(3):899–904

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Saito N, Yokoyama T, Ohira H (2016) Self-other distinction enhanced empathic responses in individuals with alexithymia. Sci Rep 6(1):1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Bloom P (2017) Empathy and its discontents. Trends Cogn Sci 21(1):24–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Matsangidou M, Otterbacher J, Ang CS, Zaphiris P (2018) Can the crowd tell how i feel? trait empathy and ethnic background in a visual pain judgment task. Univ Access Inf Soc 17(3):649–661

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Particle Data Group et al (2020) Review of particle physics. Prog Theor Exp Phys 2020(8):1–2093

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Orey S (1971) Lecture notes on limit theorems for markov chain transition probabilities

  44. Horn RA, Johnson CR (2012) Matrix analysis Cambridge university press

  45. Meyer CD (2000) Matrix analysis and applied linear algebra, vol 71 Siam

  46. Hörmander L (2007) The analysis of linear partial differential operators i: Distribution theory and fourier analysis. Springer

  47. Cormen TH, Leiserson CE, Rivest RL, Stein C (2001) Introduction to algorithms second edition. The Knuth-Morris-Pratt Algorithm

  48. Barabási AL, Albert R (1999) Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science 286 (5439):509–512

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  49. Tisseron S, Tordo F, Baddoura R (2015) Testing empathy with robots: a model in four dimensions and sixteen ítems. Int J Soc Robot 7(1):97–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Rodrigues SH, Mascarenhas S, Dias J, Paiva A (2015) A process model of empathy for virtual agents. Interact Comput 27(4):371–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Grady L (2006) Random walks for image segmentation. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 28(11):1768–1783

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Zhao S (2018) Affine formation maneuver control of multiagent systems. IEEE Trans Autom Control 63(12):4140–4155

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported in part by a grant from Touyan Project of Heilongjiang Province.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Space Science and Inertial Technology Research Center, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, 150001, China

    Jize Chen, Bo Liu, Dali Zhang, Zhenshen Qu & Changhong Wang

Authors
  1. Jize Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bo Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dali Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zhenshen Qu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Changhong Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Changhong Wang.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chen, J., Liu, B., Zhang, D. et al. Social decision-making in a large-scale MultiAgent system considering the influence of empathy. Appl Intell 53, 10068–10095 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-022-03933-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-022-03933-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation