The Impact of Social Value Orientation on Nash Equilibria of Two Player Quadratic Games

Dan Calderone; Meeko Oishi

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 31 references

The Impact of Social Value Orientation on Nash Equilibria of Two Player Quadratic Games

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read In two-player quadratic games, social value orientation traces Nash equilibria along curves that can blow up at discrete cooperation levels.

desk verdict A genuinely new spectral characterization of SVO-Nash equilibria, with a real but patchable gap around non-diagonalizable cases. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.08809 v1 pith:YNWV4WUY submitted 2024-11-13 math.OC

Dan Calderone , Meeko Oishi This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.OC MSC 91A1091A0549N7093C05

keywords socialvalueorientationNashequilibriumquadraticgameslinear-quadratictwo-playerparametrizationblow-upanalysistrajectorycoordination

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Two-player quadratic games are a standard model for competitive and cooperative interactions, and social value orientation turns each player's cost into a weighted mixture of their own cost and the opponent's cost. This paper shows that as the two cooperation angles sweep over the cooperative regime, the resulting Nash equilibrium is traced by one-dimensional curves, each obtained by solving an eigenvalue problem. The central result is an expansion of the SVO-Nash equilibrium around the standard Nash equilibrium and the altruistic Nash equilibrium, with a matrix that has eigenvalues $t/(\lambda+t)$. If all the relevant eigenvalues are positive, the equilibrium is provably contained in the intersection of four ellipsoids centered at the four classic outcomes (Nash, altruistic Nash, and each player's individual optimum). If any eigenvalue is negative, the equilibrium blows up at finitely many cooperation levels, with an explicit asymptotic direction, meaning even purely cooperative players can produce unbounded actions. This matters for designing autonomous agents that have to predict or plan around human cooperation levels.

What carries the argument

The central object is a one-parameter family of matrices built from the game data: $G_\phi(t) = ( (1/t) M H_\phi^{-1} N^{-1} + I )^{-\top}$, with $H_\phi = \mathrm{blkdg}(\cos\phi\, I_{d_1},\ \sin\phi\, I_{d_2})$, plus its Player-opt counterpart $G_\psi(t) = ( (1/t) M_1 H_\psi^{-1} M_2^{-1} + I )^{-\top}$. The spectral decomposition of the matrix products $M H_\phi^{-1} N^{-1}$ and $M_1 H_\psi^{-1} M_2^{-1}$ carries the argument: each eigenvalue $\lambda$ acts as a scalar gain $t/(\lambda + t)$ on a rank-one eigen-direction, so the sign of the real part of $\lambda$ decides whether that mode is contractive or divergent. Contraction in every mode yields the ellipsoidal containment; a negative real eigenvalue yields a finite $t = |\lambda|$ where the denominator vanishes, giving the blow-up and its explicit direction. The coordinate transformations $\Theta_\phi$ and $\Theta_\psi$ convert the two-dimensional SVO space into a fan of these one-dimensional curves, so the whole equilibrium geometry is understood through eigenvalue problems.

What would settle it

Take a concrete two-player quadratic game at a fixed $\theta$ and compute $u_\theta$ two ways: by solving the first-order conditions (5) directly, and by evaluating the spectral expansion (11) using the eigen-decomposition of $M H_\phi^{-1} N^{-1}$. The formulas must agree for every diagonalizable choice; to test the Jordan claim, construct the game so that $M H_\phi^{-1} N^{-1}$ is a single non-diagonalizable Jordan block (for instance, with $M=N=I$ and $H_\phi$ chosen so that the product has a repeated eigenvalue with only one eigenvector) and check whether the expansion still matches the direct solve. A divergence between the two computations, or a failure to diverge at $t = |\lambda_{\phi j}|$ when Prop. 7 predicts a blow-up, would refute the claimed extension.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that for every pair of social value orientations $\theta \in (0,\pi/2)^2$, the SVO-Nash equilibrium $u_\theta$ can be written as a point on a one-parameter curve. In the Nash expansion, $u_\theta = \Gamma_\phi(t) = u_N + G_\phi(t)(u_A - u_N)$, where the matrix $G_\phi(t)$ has spectral decomposition with eigenvalues $t/(\lambda_{\phi i} + t)$; the Player-opt expansion analogously has $u_\theta = u_1 + G_\psi(t)(u_2 - u_1)$. When the spectra of the two governing matrices are positive, every SVO-Nash equilibrium lies in the intersection of four ellipsoids, $B_\phi(u_N, r) \cap B_\phi(u_A, r) \cap B_\psi(u_1, r') \cap B_\psi(u_2, r')$. When a governing eigenvalue is negative real, the curve $\Gamma_\phi(t)$ blows up as $t$ approaches $|\lambda_{\phi j}|$, and the blow-up direction is the explicit vector $u_{\mathrm{inf}}^{\phi j} = \sum_{j \in J} W_{\phi j} V_{\phi j}^\top (u_A - u_N)$. The paper also applies these formulas to an open-loop linear time-varying trajectory coordination problem and shows that the predicted blow-up directions appear in the sampled trajectories.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that the matrix products $M H_\phi^{-1} N^{-1}$ and $M_1 H_\psi^{-1} M_2^{-1}$ are diagonalizable; the paper states without proof that the results would be similar in the general Jordan case, so if that fails the explicit spectral formulas and blow-up directions may not hold. The standing well-posedness condition $\theta_i \le \bar{\theta}_i$ is also only assumed informally, not carried into the theorem statements.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

In any game with positive spectra for $\Lambda_\phi$ and $\Lambda_\psi$, every cooperative SVO-Nash equilibrium is trapped inside the intersection of four ellipsoids, so the classic outcomes act as guaranteed bounds on cooperative play.
If even one negative real eigenvalue exists, the SVO-Nash equilibrium fails to exist as a finite action at finitely many cooperation values, and the explicit directions describe exactly how trajectories will be torn apart near those values.
The expansions turn the two-parameter equilibrium search into a sweep along one-dimensional curves, so predicting equilibria for many cooperation levels only requires solving eigenvalue problems once per curve.
In open-loop linear time-varying trajectory coordination, the blow-up directions in action space map directly to blow-up directions in state space, identifying the spatial patterns that become erratic near a bad cooperation level.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The results suggest that a pragmatic autonomous planner should treat cooperation levels near the negative eigenvalues as unresolvable regions: rather than solving for equilibria there, the planner can use the blow-up direction to detect when a human driver's inferred cooperation angle is drifting toward a pathological value.
Because the blow-up eigenvectors dominate the equilibrium near a singularity, estimating an opponent's cost or cooperation level from observed actions could be reduced to a low-dimensional problem: only the modes associated with the nearest negative eigenvalues need to be identified.
The ellipsoidal containment under positive spectra could serve as a certificate in human-autonomy interaction: if the inferred SVO interval lies in the positive-spectrum region, the autonomous agent can plan conservatively inside the intersection of ellipsoids without solving the game online.
The same expansion machinery may extend to Stackelberg equilibria; the paper notes that its $\theta_1$- and $\theta_2$-expansions were included partly for that reason.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The paper gives a clean spectral expansion for how social value orientation shifts Nash equilibria in two-player quadratic games. That is genuinely new and useful: the coordinate transformations in Prop. 1 and the resulting eigenvalue-parameterized curves are not in the prior SVO literature, and the bounded/unbounded classification with explicit blow-up directions goes beyond anything Schwarting et al. or Toghi et al. provide. The LQ trajectory example is a nice bonus, not a gimmick, and the derivations are mostly self-contained linear algebra.

Where it holds up: Props. 2 and 3 are correctly derived via the block matrix lemma, and the ellipsoidal bounds in Props. 4 and 5 follow from the spectral characterization. The paper is honest about the limits of Prop. 6. The central argument is sound under the stated diagonalizability assumption.

The soft spots are real but not fatal. Prop. 7, which is the main unboundedness result, has no proof in the main text, and the appendix does not seem to fill that gap. Remark 2's claim that the Jordan case is "similar" is exactly the kind of assertion that should be either proved or stated as a conjecture, because defective matrices can change pole orders in the resolvent. The stress-test note is right: for a Jordan block of size k, the blow-up is (t-t0)^(-k), not a simple pole, so the formulas as written simply do not apply. This does not invalidate the diagonalizable case, but it does mean the paper's sweep over "general two-player quadratic games" is too broad. The well-posedness cutoff theta_i <= theta-bar_i is also waved away in the body and never carried into the theorem statements; that is a minor consistency issue.

There are also some typos and a mislabeled lemma reference in the appendix. All of this is fixable, and the core contribution is worth preserving.

Who is this for? People working on cooperative control, game-theoretic human-robot interaction, or any application where SVO parameters are tuned or estimated in LQ games. They will get practical formulas and a warning about blow-up that matters. The paper deserves a serious referee, but the referee should push on the Jordan case and demand a real proof for Prop. 7 before acceptance. I would engage with it and cite it, but I would not rely on the unboundedness formulas for defective data until the gap is closed.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies two-player quadratic games in which each player's cost is the SVO-weighted combination of their own and their opponent's cost. After introducing four coordinate reparametrizations of the SVO square, the authors derive exact expansions, notably u_theta = u_N + G_phi(t)(u_A - u_N) and u_theta = u_1 + G_psi(t)(u_2 - u_1), where G_phi and G_psi are expressed through the eigendecompositions of MH_phi^{-1}N^{-1} and M1H_psi^{-1}M2^{-1}. They use these expansions to prove ellipsoidal containment of the equilibrium set when the relevant spectra are positive and to give explicit asymptotic blow-up directions when negative eigenvalues exist. The results are applied to an open-loop linear-quadratic trajectory coordination problem.

Significance. If the spectral characterizations are correct, the paper offers a clean and surprisingly rich parametric description of SVO-Nash equilibria: a one-parameter family of curves, explicit ellipsoidal bounds, and the possibility of finite-time blow-up even in the cooperative quadrant. The derivation is self-contained linear algebra, has no fitted parameters, and makes explicit, falsifiable predictions about blow-up directions that are illustrated in the trajectory example. The significance is currently tempered, however, by the fact that the main theorems are stated without the diagonalizability hypothesis that the spectral expansions require, and by the absence of a proof for the central blow-up statement.

major comments (3)

[Section 4.3, Remark 2; Props. 2, 4, 5, 7] The spectral expansions and all results built on them assume that MH_phi^{-1}N^{-1} and M1H_psi^{-1}M2^{-1} are diagonalizable, but this hypothesis is not stated in the propositions. For a defective block with a negative real eigenvalue lambda, the resolvent (I + A/t)^{-1} contains terms of order (t - |lambda|)^{-k}, where k is the size of the Jordan block; therefore the simple-pole formula in Eq. (21a) and the direction uinf_phi_j in Prop. 7 are not the general answer. The bounded case is also affected because Lemma 1 defines the P_phi-norm via the full eigenvector matrix V_phi, which does not exist for defective matrices even when the spectrum is positive. The assertion in Remark 2 that 'the results would be similar in the general Jordan case' is unproven and is not a substitute for either a complete Jordan-case derivation or an explicit diagonalizability hypothesis in the theorem statements.
[Section 5.2.1, Prop. 7] Prop. 7, which gives the asymptotic blow-up of Gamma_phi(t) as t -> |lambda_phi_j|, is stated without proof. Unlike Props. 2 and 3, whose proofs are deferred to Appendix 8.3, no derivation of Eq. (21a) is supplied anywhere in the visible manuscript. Since the explicit blow-up direction is one of the paper's main advertised contributions, this is not a cosmetic omission: the proposition must either be proved in the appendix or, if the intended proof is a direct spectral expansion, it should be written out, including the treatment of eigenvalue multiplicity and the conditions under which uinf_phi_j can vanish.
[Eq. (6); Props. 2, 5, 7] The well-posedness cutoff theta_i <= bar(theta)_i, defined by cos(theta_i) A_i + sin(theta_i) D_{-i} > 0 in Eq. (6), is not carried into the theorem statements. As written, Prop. 2 claims validity for all (theta_1, theta_2) in (0, pi/2)^2, but if D_i is indefinite and theta_i exceeds the cutoff, the player's SVO cost is indefinite and the first-order equation no longer characterizes a minimizer. The text says the assumption will be made without stating it in theorems; this overstates the range of validity of the main results. The authors should either add the cutoff condition as an explicit hypothesis or clarify, with proof, why all formulas continue to hold when the SVO costs are not well-posed.

minor comments (4)

[Lemma 1 and Prop. 4] Lemma 1 claims G_phi(t) is a contraction with respect to the P_phi-norm for all t in [0, infinity), but at t = 0 the spectral values are exactly 1 and the strict inequality in the proof fails. Consequently the open-ball inclusions in Prop. 4 are false at t = 0, where Gamma_phi(0) = u_N lies on the boundary rather than inside the open ball. The statements should either use closed balls or restrict the claim to t > 0.
[Prop. 4, Eq. (18b)] In Eq. (18b) the radius is written r' = ||u_1 - u_2||_{P_phi}, but the analogous bound for Gamma_psi(t) requires the P_psi-norm; this appears to be a typo for r' = ||u_1 - u_2||_{P_psi}.
[Appendix 8.3] The proof of 'Expansions 1 & 2' refers to 'apply Lemma 3 with w1 = t cos phi and w2 = t sin phi', but the lemma proved in that appendix is Lemma 2. The cross-reference should be corrected.
[Figure captions] Figure 9 lists theta = (3pi/8, 3pi/8) twice in the clockwise ordering, and Figures 15 and 16 describe the E3 and E4 curves with swapped references to theta_1 and theta_2. These captions should be cleaned up.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the SVO-Nash expansions and asymptotic formulas are derived from the defined cost structure and first-order conditions, with no fitted inputs or prediction-by-construction.

full rationale

The paper defines SVO-modified costs in Eq. (1) and obtains the SVO-Nash equilibrium u_theta as the solution of the coupled first-order conditions in Eq. (5). Proposition 2 (Eq. 11) and Proposition 3 (Eq. 14) follow from that explicit formula via Lemma 2, a matrix identity, together with the spectral decomposition of the relevant matrices; they do not presuppose the claims being proved. The coordinate transformations in Proposition 1 are bijections and merely reparametrize (theta_1, theta_2), so the expansions apply to every admissible SVO value rather than to a specially chosen subset. The contraction lemma and the ellipsoidal bounds in Lemma 1 and Propositions 4-5 follow from the spectral characterization of G_phi(t), and Proposition 7's blow-up directions are the corresponding resolvent asymptotics. There are no fitted parameters, no data subsets used for fitting, and no quantity that is predicted from itself: every step traces back to the defined cost functions and the standard first-order Nash conditions. The only notable gap is Remark 2, which assumes diagonalizability and asserts without proof that the Jordan case would be 'similar'; this is a rigor/completeness issue, not circularity, and it does not make the central derivation depend on its own conclusion. Similarly, the informal handling of the well-posedness bound theta_i <= theta-bar_i is a presentation issue rather than a circular step. No load-bearing self-citation chain appears, and naming the equilibrium 'SVO-Nash' is definitional terminology, not a circular argument.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central theoretical claims rest on standard positive-definiteness and invertibility assumptions for quadratic games, plus the informal well-posedness cutoff θi ≤ θ̄i and the explicitly stated diagonalizability assumption. No free parameters are fitted, and the paper introduces no new physical entities such as forces, particles, or conserved quantities.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Assumption 1a: A1, A2 ≻ 0
Assumed in Section 3 to make the original Nash equilibrium well-posed. This restricts the class of quadratic games under study.
domain assumption Assumption 2: M1, M2, M, N are invertible
Stated in Section 3. Needed for the closed-form equilibrium formulas and for the expansions. The authors note that invertibility is generally satisfied under the positive-definiteness assumptions except for particular B1, B2.
domain assumption Well-posedness of SVO costs: cosθi Ai + sinθi D−i ≻ 0, with θi ≤ θ̄i
Stated below Eq. (6) in Section 4. The paper says 'we will assume θi ≤ θ̄i' and that this bound is not explicitly stated in the theorems, making it an unflagged assumption in the theorem statements.
ad hoc to paper Diagonalizability of MHφ^{-1}N^{-1} and M1Hψ^{-1}M2^{-1}
Remark 2 after Prop. 3 assumes these matrices are diagonalizable 'for simplicity of presentation' and claims the Jordan case is similar without proof. The spectral expansions and blow-up formulas in Props. 2, 3, and 7 depend on this assumption.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The Impact of Social Value Orientation on Nash Equilibria of Two Player Quadratic Games." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YNWV4WUY

@misc{pith2026241108809,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The Impact of Social Value Orientation on Nash Equilibria of Two Player Quadratic Games},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YNWV4WUY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.08809}
}

read the original abstract

We consider two player quadratic games in a cooperative framework known as social value orientation, motivated by the need to account for complex interactions between humans and autonomous agents in dynamical systems. Social value orientation is a framework from psychology, that posits that each player incorporates the other player's cost into their own objective function, based on an individually pre-determined degree of cooperation. The degree of cooperation determines the weighting that a player puts on their own cost relative to the other player's cost. We characterize the Nash equilibria of two player quadratic games under social value orientation by creating expansions that elucidate the relative difference between this new equilibria (which we term the SVO-Nash equilibria) and more typical equilibria, such as the competitive Nash equilibria, individually optimal solutions, and the fully cooperative solution. Specifically, each expansion parametrizes the space of cooperative Nash equilibria as a family of one-dimensional curves where each curve is computed by solving an eigenvalue problem. We show that both bounded and unbounded equilibria may exist. For equilibria that are bounded, we can identify bounds as the intersection of various ellipses; for equilibria that are unbounded, we characterize conditions under which unboundedness will occur, and also compute the asymptotes that the unbounded solutions follow. We demonstrate these results in trajectory coordination scenario modeled as a linear time varying quadratic game.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.08809 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** Illustration of equilibrium points for a 2-player scalar action quadratic game. Level sets [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Alternative parametrizations of the θ ∈ [0, π/2] × [0, π/2] space in terms of coordinates (ϕ, t) and (ψ, t) for Exp.1 and Exp 2. respectively. Note the limit points for different values of ϕ and ψ as t → ∞ and t → ∞. 4 SVO Nash Equilibria For different values of the SVO, we can compute how the Nash equilibria will shift by resolving the optimality conditions with the new costs, that is by solving the system of equat… view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (13 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: (E1) Nash-Expansion: The curves Γϕ(t) : t ∈ [0, ∞) for ϕ ∈ (0, π/2) are shown in color sweeping from uN to uA. (Parameter values are given in App. 8.5) The curves Γϕ(t) for the scalar action case are illustrated in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: (E2) Player-Optimal-Expansion: The curves Γψ(t) : t ∈ [0, ∞) for ψ ∈ (0, π/2) are shown in color sweeping from u1 to u2. (Parameter values are given in App. 8.5) Proof. (See Appendix 8.3) The curves Γψ(t) for the scalar action case are illustrated in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:…

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Illustration of the set of SVO-equilibria for 3D example, with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png]

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: (Left) Ellipsoidal bounds on Γϕ(t) for t ∈ [0, ∞) when spec(Λϕ) > 0 from Eq. (18a). (Right) Ellipsoidal bounds on Γψ(t) for t ∈ [0, ∞) when spec(Λψ) > 0. Note that the dependence on r, r′ and t are suppressed for clarity. Parameter values are given in App. 8.5. comes f…

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: Joint ellipsoidal bounds on uθ = Γϕ(t) ∩ Γψ(t) for (ϕ, t) = Θ−1 ϕ (θ) and (ψ, t) = Θ−1 ψ (θ) when spec(Λϕ) > 0 and spec(Λψ) > 0 from Eq. (20). Note that the dependence on r, r′ and t are suppressed for clarity. Parameter values are given in App. 8.5. ✓1 ✓2 ⇡ 2 ⇡ 2 [PI…

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: For different values of θ, the corresponding values of ϕ and ψ vary and thus the shapes of the Pϕ and Pψ-balls vary as well. The resulting shapes of the ellipsiodal bounds and their intersections is illustrated for several different values of θ. Clockwise from the top…

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: Set of SVO equilibria for M1,M2 in Eq. (22) with (from left-to-right) γ = π/8, γ = 0, and γ = −π/8. In these examples both spec(Λϕ) > 0 and spec(Λψ) > 0 and the set of SVO-equilibria is quite localized. u1 uA u2 uN uS u1 u2 u1 u2 u1 u2 ✓1 ✓2 ✓1 ✓2 ✓1 ✓2 blow-up pts bl…

**Figure 11.** Figure 11: Set of SVO equilibria (curves Γϕ(t) for M1,M2 in Eq. (22) with (from left-to-right) γ = 7π/16, γ = 8π/16, and γ = 9π/16. In these examples spec(Λϕ) ≯ 0 and and there are finiteblowup points for most values of ϕ as illustrated in the inset. Note how in the left and ri…

**Figure 12.** Figure 12: (Left) Desired trajectories x¯ from initial conditions x¯0 = (−1, 0, 0, −1) to desired terminal conditions x¯K = (1, 0, 0, 1). (Right) Original Nash equilibrium xN. Note that since the tracking cost is relatively large, the Nash tracks almost exactly with the desired …

**Figure 13.** Figure 13: Problematic SVO values that cause unbounded SVO-equilibria. We focus on the curve [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_13.png]

**Figure 14.** Figure 14: Sample SVO value around the problematic blow-up points on the curve [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_14.png]

**Figure 15.** Figure 15: (E3) θ1-Expansion: The curves Γθ1 (t) : t ∈ [0, ∞) for θ1 ∈ [0, π/2] are shown in color sweeping from the point uθ1 (Parameter values are given in App. 8.5) u1 u2 ✓1 ✓2 ⇡ 2 ⇡ 2 u1 uA uN u2 @J1 @u1 =0 @J1 @u2 =0 @J2 @u2 =0 @J2 @u1 =0 t ✓2 (t): t 2 [0, 1) [PITH_FULL_I…

**Figure 16.** Figure 16: (E4) θ2-Expansion: The curves Γθ2 (t) : t ∈ [0, ∞) for θ1 ∈ [0, π/2] are shown in color sweeping from the point uθ2 (Parameter values are given in App. 8.5) 24 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_16.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages

[1]

Cooperative game-based approximate optimal control of modular robot manipulators for human--robot collaboration

Tianjiao An, Yuexi Wang, Guangjun Liu, Yuanchun Li, and Bo Dong. Cooperative game-based approximate optimal control of modular robot manipulators for human--robot collaboration. IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, 53 0 (7): 0 4691--4703, 2023

work page 2023
[2]

Learning robot objectives from physical human interaction

Andrea Bajcsy, Dylan P Losey, Marcia K O'malley, and Anca D Dragan. Learning robot objectives from physical human interaction. In Conference on robot learning, pages 217--226. PMLR, 2017

work page 2017
[3]

Dynamic noncooperative game theory

Tamer Ba s ar and Geert Jan Olsder. Dynamic noncooperative game theory. SIAM, 1998

work page 1998
[4]

The factorization of a square matrix into two symmetric matrices

AJ Bosch. The factorization of a square matrix into two symmetric matrices. The American Mathematical Monthly, 93 0 (6): 0 462--464, 1986

work page 1986
[5]

Trash in motion: Emergent interactions with a robotic trashcan

Barry Brown, Fanjun Bu, Ilan Mandel, and Wendy Ju. Trash in motion: Emergent interactions with a robotic trashcan. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 1--17, 2024

work page 2024
[6]

Learning legible motion from human--robot interactions

Baptiste Busch, Jonathan Grizou, Manuel Lopes, and Freek Stulp. Learning legible motion from human--robot interactions. International Journal of Social Robotics, 9 0 (5): 0 765--779, 2017

work page 2017
[7]

Modelling collaborative strategies in physical human-human interaction

Vinil Thekkedath Chackochan and Vittorio Sanguineti. Modelling collaborative strategies in physical human-human interaction. In Converging Clinical and Engineering Research on Neurorehabilitation II: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on NeuroRehabilitation (ICNR2016), October 18-21, 2016, Segovia, Spain, pages 253--258. Springer, 2017

work page 2016
[8]

Integrating human observer inferences into robot motion planning

Anca Dragan and Siddhartha Srinivasa. Integrating human observer inferences into robot motion planning. Autonomous Robots, 37: 0 351--368, 2014

work page 2014

Show all 31 references

[9]

Deceptive robot motion: synthesis, analysis and experiments

Anca Dragan, Rachel Holladay, and Siddhartha Srinivasa. Deceptive robot motion: synthesis, analysis and experiments. Autonomous Robots, 39: 0 331--345, 2015 a

2015
[10]

Legibility and predictability of robot motion

Anca D Dragan, Kenton CT Lee, and Siddhartha S Srinivasa. Legibility and predictability of robot motion. In 2013 8th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), pages 301--308. IEEE, 2013

2013
[11]

Effects of robot motion on human-robot collaboration

Anca D Dragan, Shira Bauman, Jodi Forlizzi, and Siddhartha S Srinivasa. Effects of robot motion on human-robot collaboration. In Proceedings of the tenth annual ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction, pages 51--58, 2015 b

2015
[12]

Communicating intent on the road through human-inspired control schemes

Katherine Driggs-Campbell and Ruzena Bajcsy. Communicating intent on the road through human-inspired control schemes. In 2016 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), pages 3042--3047. IEEE, 2016

2016
[13]

Integrating intuitive driver models in autonomous planning for interactive maneuvers

Katherine Driggs-Campbell, Vijay Govindarajan, and Ruzena Bajcsy. Integrating intuitive driver models in autonomous planning for interactive maneuvers. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 18 0 (12): 0 3461--3472, 2017

2017
[14]

Nash equilibrium seeking in noncooperative games

Paul Frihauf, Miroslav Krstic, and Tamer Basar. Nash equilibrium seeking in noncooperative games. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 57 0 (5): 0 1192--1207, 2011

2011
[15]

Modeling social situation awareness in driving interactions

Navit Klein, Hauke Sandhaus, David Goedicke, Wendy Ju, and Avi Parush. Modeling social situation awareness in driving interactions. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, pages 259--271, 2024

2024
[16]

Legible robot navigation in the proximity of moving humans

Thibault Kruse, Patrizia Basili, Stefan Glasauer, and Alexandra Kirsch. Legible robot navigation in the proximity of moving humans. In 2012 IEEE workshop on advanced robotics and its social impacts (ARSO), pages 83--88. IEEE, 2012

2012
[17]

Quadratic games

Nicolas S Lambert, Giorgio Martini, and Michael Ostrovsky. Quadratic games. Technical report, National Bureau of Economic Research, 2018

2018
[18]

A framework of human--robot coordination based on game theory and policy iteration

Yanan Li, Keng Peng Tee, Rui Yan, Wei Liang Chan, and Yan Wu. A framework of human--robot coordination based on game theory and policy iteration. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 32 0 (6): 0 1408--1418, 2016

2016
[19]

The ring measure of social values: A computerized procedure for assessing individual differences in information processing and social value orientation

Wim BG Liebrand and Charles G McClintock. The ring measure of social values: A computerized procedure for assessing individual differences in information processing and social value orientation. European journal of personality, 2 0 (3): 0 217--230, 1988

1988
[20]

Nash equilibria in human sensorimotor interactions explained by q-learning with intrinsic costs

Cecilia Lindig-Le \'o n, Gerrit Schmid, and Daniel A Braun. Nash equilibria in human sensorimotor interactions explained by q-learning with intrinsic costs. Scientific Reports, 11 0 (1): 0 20779, 2021

2021
[21]

A noncooperative game approach to autonomous racing

Alexander Liniger and John Lygeros. A noncooperative game approach to autonomous racing. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, 28 0 (3): 0 884--897, 2019

2019
[22]

Social value orientation and helping behavior 1

Charles G McClintock and Scott T Allison. Social value orientation and helping behavior 1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 19 0 (4): 0 353--362, 1989

1989
[23]

Haptic shared control for human-robot collaboration: A game-theoretical approach

Selma Musi \'c and Sandra Hirche. Haptic shared control for human-robot collaboration: A game-theoretical approach. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 53 0 (2): 0 10216--10222, 2020

2020
[24]

Non-cooperative games

John F Nash et al. Non-cooperative games. 1950

1950
[25]

Planning for autonomous cars that leverage effects on human actions

Dorsa Sadigh, Shankar Sastry, Sanjit A Seshia, and Anca D Dragan. Planning for autonomous cars that leverage effects on human actions. In Robotics: Science and systems, volume 2, pages 1--9. Ann Arbor, MI, USA, 2016

2016
[26]

Planning for cars that coordinate with people: leveraging effects on human actions for planning and active information gathering over human internal state

Dorsa Sadigh, Nick Landolfi, Shankar S Sastry, Sanjit A Seshia, and Anca D Dragan. Planning for cars that coordinate with people: leveraging effects on human actions for planning and active information gathering over human internal state. Autonomous Robots, 42: 0 1405--1426, 2018

2018
[27]

Social behavior for autonomous vehicles

Wilko Schwarting, Alyssa Pierson, Javier Alonso-Mora, Sertac Karaman, and Daniela Rus. Social behavior for autonomous vehicles. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116 0 (50): 0 24972--24978, 2019

2019
[28]

Safety assurances for human-robot interaction via confidence-aware game-theoretic human models

Ran Tian, Liting Sun, Andrea Bajcsy, Masayoshi Tomizuka, and Anca D Dragan. Safety assurances for human-robot interaction via confidence-aware game-theoretic human models. In 2022 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pages 11229--11235. IEEE, 2022

2022
[29]

Cooperative autonomous vehicles that sympathize with human drivers

Behrad Toghi, Rodolfo Valiente, Dorsa Sadigh, Ramtin Pedarsani, and Yaser P Fallah. Cooperative autonomous vehicles that sympathize with human drivers. In 2021 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), pages 4517--4524. IEEE, 2021

2021
[30]

A sequential quadratic programming approach to the solution of open-loop generalized nash equilibria for autonomous racing

Edward L Zhu and Francesco Borrelli. A sequential quadratic programming approach to the solution of open-loop generalized nash equilibria for autonomous racing. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.00186, 2024

2024 arXiv
[31]

A framework for human-robot-human physical interaction based on n-player game theory

Rui Zou, Yubin Liu, Jie Zhao, and Hegao Cai. A framework for human-robot-human physical interaction based on n-player game theory. Sensors, 20 0 (17): 0 5005, 2020

2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Cooperative game-based approximate optimal control of modular robot manipulators for human--robot collaboration

Tianjiao An, Yuexi Wang, Guangjun Liu, Yuanchun Li, and Bo Dong. Cooperative game-based approximate optimal control of modular robot manipulators for human--robot collaboration. IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, 53 0 (7): 0 4691--4703, 2023

work page 2023

[2] [2]

Learning robot objectives from physical human interaction

Andrea Bajcsy, Dylan P Losey, Marcia K O'malley, and Anca D Dragan. Learning robot objectives from physical human interaction. In Conference on robot learning, pages 217--226. PMLR, 2017

work page 2017

[3] [3]

Dynamic noncooperative game theory

Tamer Ba s ar and Geert Jan Olsder. Dynamic noncooperative game theory. SIAM, 1998

work page 1998

[4] [4]

The factorization of a square matrix into two symmetric matrices

AJ Bosch. The factorization of a square matrix into two symmetric matrices. The American Mathematical Monthly, 93 0 (6): 0 462--464, 1986

work page 1986

[5] [5]

Trash in motion: Emergent interactions with a robotic trashcan

Barry Brown, Fanjun Bu, Ilan Mandel, and Wendy Ju. Trash in motion: Emergent interactions with a robotic trashcan. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 1--17, 2024

work page 2024

[6] [6]

Learning legible motion from human--robot interactions

Baptiste Busch, Jonathan Grizou, Manuel Lopes, and Freek Stulp. Learning legible motion from human--robot interactions. International Journal of Social Robotics, 9 0 (5): 0 765--779, 2017

work page 2017

[7] [7]

Modelling collaborative strategies in physical human-human interaction

Vinil Thekkedath Chackochan and Vittorio Sanguineti. Modelling collaborative strategies in physical human-human interaction. In Converging Clinical and Engineering Research on Neurorehabilitation II: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on NeuroRehabilitation (ICNR2016), October 18-21, 2016, Segovia, Spain, pages 253--258. Springer, 2017

work page 2016

[8] [8]

Integrating human observer inferences into robot motion planning

Anca Dragan and Siddhartha Srinivasa. Integrating human observer inferences into robot motion planning. Autonomous Robots, 37: 0 351--368, 2014

work page 2014