Cleotilde Gonzalez

Jinfeng Lou, Zijie Liang, Pengkun Liu et al.

Decision-making in urban infrastructure management during extreme events relies heavily on human operators, yet current computational support systems often fail to account for non-monotonic human adaptation and latent psychological biases like overconfidence and defensive overcorrection. This study addresses this gap by integrating Instance-Based Learning Theory (IBLT) into the domain of civil engineering computing. We establish a computational cognitive architecture that simulates operator decision processes through the mathematical mechanisms of memory retrieval and utility blending. This model functions as a computational baseline, representing boundedly rational adaptation driven by experiential priors, thus allowing for the algorithmic isolation of latent psychological biases from the baseline dynamics of memory-based learning. We demonstrated this framework using a human-in-the-loop microworld experiment simulating subway flood-induced track suspensions, where dispatchers must balance passenger safety against service efficiency. Analysis revealed a complex, non-linear human adaptation cycle consisting of four phases: acquisition, overconfidence, overcorrection, and recalibration. Specifically, the computational model exposed a significant divergence during the post-accident "overcorrection" phase: while human operators exhibited immediate, defensive risk overestimation, the model maintained a stable trajectory based on accumulated experience. This strategic divergence confirms that operational instability following failure is often attributable to acute psychological bias overriding stable memory-based adaptation, a pattern theoretically expected to recur across analogous high-stakes environments and validatable through multi-modal behavioral and sensor data from professional operators.

Thuy Ngoc Nguyen, Duy Nhat Phan, Cleotilde Gonzalez

Developing effective Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) is critical for many applications requiring collaboration and coordination with humans. Despite the rapid advance of Multi-Agent Deep Reinforcement Learning (MADRL) in cooperative MAS, one major challenge is the simultaneous learning and interaction of independent agents in dynamic environments in the presence of stochastic rewards. State-of-the-art MADRL models struggle to perform well in Coordinated Multi-agent Object Transportation Problems (CMOTPs), wherein agents must coordinate with each other and learn from stochastic rewards. In contrast, humans often learn rapidly to adapt to nonstationary environments that require coordination among people. In this paper, motivated by the demonstrated ability of cognitive models based on Instance-Based Learning Theory (IBLT) to capture human decisions in many dynamic decision making tasks, we propose three variants of Multi-Agent IBL models (MAIBL). The idea of these MAIBL algorithms is to combine the cognitive mechanisms of IBLT and the techniques of MADRL models to deal with coordination MAS in stochastic environments from the perspective of independent learners. We demonstrate that the MAIBL models exhibit faster learning and achieve better coordination in a dynamic CMOTP task with various settings of stochastic rewards compared to current MADRL models. We discuss the benefits of integrating cognitive insights into MADRL models.

Thuy Ngoc Nguyen, Chase McDonald, Cleotilde Gonzalez

Temporal credit assignment is crucial for learning and skill development in natural and artificial intelligence. While computational methods like the TD approach in reinforcement learning have been proposed, it's unclear if they accurately represent how humans handle feedback delays. Cognitive models intend to represent the mental steps by which humans solve problems and perform a number of tasks, but limited research in cognitive science has addressed the credit assignment problem in humans and cognitive models. Our research uses a cognitive model based on a theory of decisions from experience, Instance-Based Learning Theory (IBLT), to test different credit assignment mechanisms in a goal-seeking navigation task with varying levels of decision complexity. Instance-Based Learning (IBL) models simulate the process of making sequential choices with different credit assignment mechanisms, including a new IBL-TD model that combines the IBL decision mechanism with the TD approach. We found that (1) An IBL model that gives equal credit assignment to all decisions is able to match human performance better than other models, including IBL-TD and Q-learning; (2) IBL-TD and Q-learning models underperform compared to humans initially, but eventually, they outperform humans; (3) humans are influenced by decision complexity, while models are not. Our study provides insights into the challenges of capturing human behavior and the potential opportunities to use these models in future AI systems to support human activities.

Tailia Malloy, Cleotilde Gonzalez

Designing cyber defense systems to account for cognitive biases in human decision making has demonstrated significant success in improving performance against human attackers. However, much of the attention in this area has focused on relatively simple accounts of biases in human attackers, and little is known about adversarial behavior or how defenses could be improved by disrupting attacker's behavior. In this work, we present a novel model of human decision-making inspired by the cognitive faculties of Instance-Based Learning Theory, Theory of Mind, and Transfer of Learning. This model functions by learning from both roles in a security scenario: defender and attacker, and by making predictions of the opponent's beliefs, intentions, and actions. The proposed model can better defend against attacks from a wide range of opponents compared to alternatives that attempt to perform optimally without accounting for human biases. Additionally, the proposed model performs better against a range of human-like behavior by explicitly modeling human transfer of learning, which has not yet been applied to cyber defense scenarios. Results from simulation experiments demonstrate the potential usefulness of cognitively inspired models of agents trained in attack and defense roles and how these insights could potentially be used in real-world cybersecurity.

Chase McDonald, Cleotilde Gonzalez

The increasing integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in everyday life brings with it new challenges and questions for regarding how humans interact with autonomous agents. Multi-agent experiments, where humans and AI act together, can offer important opportunities to study social decision making, but there is a lack of accessible tooling available to researchers to run such experiments. We introduce two tools designed to reduce these barriers. The first, CoGrid, is a multi-agent grid-based simulation library with dual NumPy and JAX backends. The second, Multi-User Gymnasium (MUG), translates such simulation environments directly into interactive web-based experiments. MUG supports interactions with arbitrary numbers of humans and AI, utilizing either server-authoritative or peer-to-peer networking with rollback netcode to account for latency. Together, these tools can enable researchers to deploy studies of human-AI interaction, facilitating inquiry into core questions of psychology, cognition, and decision making and their relationship to human-AI interaction. Both tools are open source and available to the broader research community. Documentation and source code is available at {cogrid, multi-user-gymnasium}.readthedocs.io. This paper details the functionality of these tools and presents several case studies to illustrate their utility in human-AI multi-agent experimentation.

Thuy Ngoc Nguyen, Kasturi Jamale, Cleotilde Gonzalez

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated their capabilities across various tasks, from language translation to complex reasoning. Understanding and predicting human behavior and biases are crucial for artificial intelligence (AI) assisted systems to provide useful assistance, yet it remains an open question whether these models can achieve this. This paper addresses this gap by leveraging the reasoning and generative capabilities of the LLMs to predict human behavior in two sequential decision-making tasks. These tasks involve balancing between exploitative and exploratory actions and handling delayed feedback, both essential for simulating real-life decision processes. We compare the performance of LLMs with a cognitive instance-based learning (IBL) model, which imitates human experiential decision-making. Our findings indicate that LLMs excel at rapidly incorporating feedback to enhance prediction accuracy. In contrast, the cognitive IBL model better accounts for human exploratory behaviors and effectively captures loss aversion bias, i.e., the tendency to choose a sub-optimal goal with fewer step-cost penalties rather than exploring to find the optimal choice, even with limited experience. The results highlight the benefits of integrating LLMs with cognitive architectures, suggesting that this synergy could enhance the modeling and understanding of complex human decision-making patterns.

Roderick Seow, Yunfan Zhao, Duncan Wood et al.

For public health programs with limited resources, the ability to predict how behaviors change over time and in response to interventions is crucial for deciding when and to whom interventions should be allocated. Using data from a real-world maternal health program, we demonstrate how a cognitive model based on Instance-Based Learning (IBL) Theory can augment existing purely computational approaches. Our findings show that, compared to general time-series forecasters (e.g., LSTMs), IBL models, which reflect human decision-making processes, better predict the dynamics of individuals' states. Additionally, IBL provides estimates of the volatility in individuals' states and their sensitivity to interventions, which can improve the efficiency of training of other time series models.

Tailia Malloy, Maria José Ferreira, Fei Fang et al.

Cosine similarity between two documents can be computed using token embeddings formed by Large Language Models (LLMs) such as GPT-4, and used to categorize those documents across a range of uses. However, these similarities are ultimately dependent on the corpora used to train these LLMs, and may not reflect subjective similarity of individuals or how their biases and constraints impact similarity metrics. This lack of cognitively-aware personalization of similarity metrics can be particularly problematic in educational and recommendation settings where there is a limited number of individual judgements of category or preference, and biases can be particularly relevant. To address this, we rely on an integration of an Instance-Based Learning (IBL) cognitive model with LLM embeddings to develop the Instance-Based Individualized Similarity (IBIS) metric. This similarity metric is beneficial in that it takes into account individual biases and constraints in a manner that is grounded in the cognitive mechanisms of decision making. To evaluate the IBIS metric, we also introduce a dataset of human categorizations of emails as being either dangerous (phishing) or safe (ham). This dataset is used to demonstrate the benefits of leveraging a cognitive model to measure the subjective similarity of human participants in an educational setting.

Changyu Chen, Shashank Reddy Chirra, Maria José Ferreira et al.

Modeling human cognitive processes in dynamic decision-making tasks has been an endeavor in AI for a long time because such models can help make AI systems more intuitive, personalized, mitigate any human biases, and enhance training in simulation. Some initial work has attempted to utilize neural networks (and large language models) but often assumes one common model for all humans and aims to emulate human behavior in aggregate. However, the behavior of each human is distinct, heterogeneous, and relies on specific past experiences in certain tasks. For instance, consider two individuals responding to a phishing email: one who has previously encountered and identified similar threats may recognize it quickly, while another without such experience might fall for the scam. In this work, we build on Instance Based Learning (IBL) that posits that human decisions are based on similar situations encountered in the past. However, IBL relies on simple fixed form functions to capture the mapping from past situations to current decisions. To that end, we propose two new attention-based neural network models to have open form non-linear functions to model distinct and heterogeneous human decision-making in dynamic settings. We experiment with two distinct datasets gathered from human subject experiment data, one focusing on detection of phishing email by humans and another where humans act as attackers in a cybersecurity setting and decide on an attack option. We conducted extensive experiments with our two neural network models, IBL, and GPT3.5, and demonstrate that the neural network models outperform IBL significantly in representing human decision-making, while providing similar interpretability of human decisions as IBL. Overall, our work yields promising results for further use of neural networks in cognitive modeling of human decision making.

Thuy Ngoc Nguyen, Duy Nhat Phan, Cleotilde Gonzalez

Theory of Mind (ToM) is central to social cognition and human-AI interaction, and Large Language Models (LLMs) have been used to help understand and represent ToM. However, most evaluations treat ToM as a static judgment at a single moment, primarily relying on tests of false beliefs. This overlooks a key dynamic dimension of ToM: the ability to represent, update, and retrieve others' beliefs over time. We investigate dynamic ToM as a temporally extended representational memory problem, asking whether LLMs can track belief trajectories across interactions rather than only inferring current beliefs. We introduce DToM-Track, an evaluation framework to investigate temporal belief reasoning in controlled multiturn conversations, testing the recall of beliefs held prior to an update, the inference of current beliefs, and the detection of belief change. Using LLMs as computational probes, we find a consistent asymmetry: models reliably infer an agent's current belief but struggle to maintain and retrieve prior belief states once updates occur. This pattern persists across LLM model families and scales, and is consistent with recency bias and interference effects well documented in cognitive science. These results suggest that tracking belief trajectories over time poses a distinct challenge beyond classical false-belief reasoning. By framing ToM as a problem of temporal representation and retrieval, this work connects ToM to core cognitive mechanisms of memory and interference and exposes the implications for LLM models of social reasoning in extended human-AI interactions.

Thuy Ngoc Nguyen, Duy Nhat Phan, Cleotilde Gonzalez

Instance-Based Learning Theory (IBLT) is a comprehensive account of how humans make decisions from experience during dynamic tasks. Since it was first proposed almost two decades ago, multiple computational models have been constructed based on IBLT (i.e., IBL models). These models have been demonstrated to be very successful in explaining and predicting human decisions in multiple decision making contexts. However, as IBLT has evolved, the initial description of the theory has become less precise, and it is unclear how its demonstration can be expanded to more complex, dynamic, and multi-agent environments. This paper presents an updated version of the current theoretical components of IBLT in a comprehensive and precise form. It also provides an advanced implementation of the full set of theoretical mechanisms, SpeedyIBL, to unlock the capabilities of IBLT to handle a diverse taxonomy of individual and multi-agent decision-making problems. SpeedyIBL addresses a practical computational issue in past implementations of IBL models, the curse of exponential growth, that emerges from memory-based tabular computations. When more observations accumulate over time, there is an exponential growth of the memory of instances that leads directly to an exponential slow down of the computational time. Thus, SpeedyIBL leverages parallel computation with vectorization to speed up the execution time of IBL models. We evaluate the robustness of SpeedyIBL over an existing implementation of IBLT in decision games of increased complexity. The results not only demonstrate the applicability of IBLT through a wide range of decision making tasks, but also highlight the improvement of SpeedyIBL over its prior implementation as the complexity of decision features and number of agents increase. The library is open sourced for the use of the broad research community.

Thuy Ngoc Nguyen, Anita Williams Woolley, Cleotilde Gonzalez

Coordinated teamwork is essential in fast-paced decision-making environments that require dynamic adaptation, often without an opportunity for explicit communication. Although implicit coordination has been extensively considered in the existing literature, the majority of work has focused on co-located, synchronous teamwork (such as sports teams) or, in distributed teams, primarily on coordination of knowledge work. However, many teams (firefighters, military, law enforcement, emergency response) must coordinate their movements in physical space without the benefit of visual cues or extensive explicit communication. This paper investigates how three dimensions of spatial coordination, namely exploration diversity, movement specialization, and adaptive spatial proximity, influence team performance in a collaborative online search and rescue task where explicit communication is restricted and team members rely on movement patterns to infer others' intentions and coordinate actions. Our metrics capture the relational aspects of teamwork by measuring spatial proximity, distribution patterns, and alignment of movements within shared environments. We analyze data from 34 four-person teams (136 participants) assigned to specialized roles in a search and rescue task. Results show that spatial specialization positively predicts performance, while adaptive spatial proximity exhibits a marginal inverted U-shaped relationship, suggesting moderate levels of adaptation are optimal. Furthermore, the temporal dynamics of these metrics differentiate high- from low-performing teams over time. These findings provide insights into implicit spatial coordination in role-based teamwork and highlight the importance of balanced adaptive strategies, with implications for training and AI-assisted team support systems.

Chase McDonald, Cleotilde Gonzalez

Research on human-AI collaboration often prioritizes objective performance. However, understanding human subjective preferences is essential to improving human-AI complementarity and human experiences. We investigate human preferences for controllability in a shared workspace task with AI partners using Behavior Shaping (BS), a reinforcement learning algorithm that allows humans explicit control over AI behavior. In one experiment, we validate the robustness of BS in producing effective AI policies relative to self-play policies, when controls are hidden. In another experiment, we enable human control, showing that participants perceive AI partners as more effective and enjoyable when they can directly dictate AI behavior. Our findings highlight the need to design AI that prioritizes both task performance and subjective human preferences. By aligning AI behavior with human preferences, we demonstrate how human-AI complementarity can extend beyond objective outcomes to include subjective preferences.

Tailia Malloy, Roderick Seow, Cleotilde Gonzalez

Attention can be used to inform choice selection in contextual bandit tasks even when context features have not been previously experienced. One example of this is in dimensional shifts, where additional feature values are introduced and the relationship between features and outcomes can either be static or variable. Attentional mechanisms have been extensively studied in contextual bandit tasks where the feedback of choices is provided immediately, but less research has been done on tasks where feedback is delayed or in counterfactual feedback cases. Some methods have successfully modeled human attention with immediate feedback based on reward prediction errors (RPEs), though recent research raises questions of the applicability of RPEs onto more general attentional mechanisms. Alternative models suggest that information theoretic metrics can be used to model human attention, with broader applications to novel stimuli. In this paper, we compare two different methods for modeling how humans attend to specific features of decision making tasks, one that is based on calculating an information theoretic metric using a memory of past experiences, and another that is based on iteratively updating attention from reward prediction errors. We compare these models using simulations in a contextual bandit task with both intradimensional and extradimensional domain shifts, as well as immediate, delayed, and counterfactual feedback. We find that calculating an information theoretic metric over a history of experiences is best able to account for human-like behavior in tasks that shift dimensions and alter feedback presentation. These results indicate that information theoretic metrics of attentional mechanisms may be better suited than RPEs to predict human attention in decision making, though further studies of human behavior are necessary to support these results.

Palvi Aggarwal, Yinuo Du, Kuldeep Singh et al.

One of the widely used cyber deception techniques is decoying, where defenders create fictitious machines (i.e., honeypots) to lure attackers. Honeypots are deployed to entice attackers, but their effectiveness depends on their configuration as that would influence whether attackers will judge them as "real" machines or not. In this work, we study two-sided deception, where we manipulate the observed configuration of both honeypots and real machines. The idea is to improve cyberdefense by either making honeypots ``look like'' real machines or by making real machines ``look like honeypots.'"We identify the modifiable features of both real machines and honeypots and conceal these features to different degrees. In an experiment, we study three conditions: default features on both honeypot and real machines, concealed honeypots only, and concealed both honeypots and real machines. We use a network with 40 machines where 20 of them are honeypots. We manipulate the features of the machines, and using an experimental testbed (HackIT), we test the effectiveness of the decoying strategies against humans attackers. Results indicate that: Any of the two forms of deception (conceal honeypots and conceal both honeypots and real machines) is better than no deception at all. We observe that attackers attempted more exploits on honeypots and exfiltrated more data from honeypots in the two forms of deception conditions. However, the attacks on honeypots and data exfiltration were not different within the deception conditions. Results inform cybersecurity defenders on how to manipulate the observable features of honeypots and real machines to create uncertainty for attackers and improve cyberdefense.