On Corrigibility and Alignment in Multi Agent Games
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Corrigibility of autonomous agents is an under explored part of system design, with previous work focusing on single agent systems. It has been suggested that uncertainty over the human preferences acts to keep the agents corrigible, even in the face of human irrationality. We present a general framework for modelling corrigibility in a multi-agent setting as a 2 player game in which the agents always have a move in which they can ask the human for supervision. This is formulated as a Bayesian game for the purpose of introducing uncertainty over the human beliefs. We further analyse two specific cases. First, a two player corrigibility game, in which we want corrigibility displayed in both agents for both common payoff (monotone) games and harmonic games. Then we investigate an adversary setting, in which one agent is considered to be a `defending' agent and the other an `adversary'. A general result is provided for what belief over the games and human rationality the defending agent is required to have to induce corrigibility.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 9 Jan 2025.
Builds on
0 of 0 references.
No references here yet.
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Core Safety Values for Provably Corrigible Agents
- 2026CoopEval: Benchmarking Cooperation-Sustaining Mechanisms and LLM Agents in Social Dilemmas
- 2025The Oversight Game: Learning to Cooperatively Balance an AI Agent's Safety and Autonomy
- 2025Emergent Alignment via Competition
- 2024Emergent Cooperation under Uncertain Incentive Alignment
- 2026Enhancing Decision-Making with Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Fictitious Play
- 2026AI Alignment through a Game-theoretic Lens: A Survey
- 2026A game theory for foundation models shows new paths to rational cooperation through similarity inference