Serious Games: Human-AI Interaction, Evolution, and Coevolution

TL;DR

This paper explores how Evolutionary Game Theory models can predict and analyze the dynamic coevolution of humans and AI in serious gaming contexts, highlighting potential equilibria and cooperation mechanisms.

Contribution

It examines three key EGT models—Hawk-Dove, Prisoner's Dilemma, and War of Attrition—in relation to human-AI interaction and coevolution, providing insights into strategic dynamics.

Findings

EGT models can predict balanced and asymmetric equilibria in human-AI interactions.

Repeated interactions and memory can foster cooperation between humans and AI.

Resource competition may lead to strategic coevolution and shared conventions.

Abstract

The serious games between humans and AI have only just begun. Evolutionary Game Theory (EGT) models the competitive and cooperative strategies of biological entities. EGT could help predict the potential evolutionary equilibrium of humans and AI. The objective of this work was to examine some of the EGT models relevant to human-AI interaction, evolution, and coevolution. Of thirteen EGT models considered, three were examined: the Hawk-Dove Game, Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma, and the War of Attrition. This selection was based on the widespread acceptance and clear relevance of these models to potential human-AI evolutionary dynamics and coevolutionary trajectories. The Hawk-Dove Game predicts balanced mixed-strategy equilibria based on the costs of conflict. It also shows the potential for balanced coevolution rather than dominance. Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma suggests that repeated interaction may lead to cognitive coevolution. It demonstrates how memory and reciprocity can lead to cooperation. The War of Attrition suggests that competition for resources may result in strategic coevolution, asymmetric equilibria, and conventions on sharing resources. Therefore, EGT may provide a suitable framework to understand and predict the human-AI evolutionary dynamic. However, future research could extend beyond EGT and explore additional frameworks, empirical validation methods, and interdisciplinary perspectives. AI is being shaped by human input and is evolving in response to it. So too, neuroplasticity allows the human brain to grow and evolve in response to stimuli. If humans and AI converge in future, what might be the result of human neuroplasticity combined with an ever-evolving AI? Future research should be mindful of the ethical and cognitive implications of human-AI interaction, evolution, and coevolution.