title: Nash equilibria in multi-agent motor interactions.
abstract: Social interactions in classic cognitive games like the ultimatum game or the prisoner's dilemma typically lead to Nash equilibria when multiple competitive decision makers with perfect knowledge select optimal strategies. However, in evolutionary game theory it has been shown that Nash equilibria can also arise as attractors in dynamical systems that can describe, for example, the population dynamics of microorganisms. Similar to such evolutionary dynamics, we find that Nash equilibria arise naturally in motor interactions in which players vie for control and try to minimize effort. When confronted with sensorimotor interaction tasks that correspond to the classical prisoner's dilemma and the rope-pulling game, two-player motor interactions led predominantly to Nash solutions. In contrast, when a single player took both roles, playing the sensorimotor game bimanually, cooperative solutions were found. Our methodology opens up a new avenue for the study of human motor interactions within a game theoretic framework, suggesting that the coupling of motor systems can lead to game theoretic solutions.
authors.affiliation: Computational and Biological Learning Laboratory, Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. dab54@cam.ac.uk
authors.forename: Daniel A
authors.initials: DA
authors.lastname: Braun
authors.forename: Pedro A
authors.initials: PA
authors.lastname: Ortega
authors.forename: Daniel M
authors.initials: DM
authors.lastname: Wolpert
mesh_terms: D005716:Game Theory; D005828:Genetics, Population; D006801:Humans; D008962:Models, Theoretical; D009043:Motor Activity
references.citation: Percept Mot Skills. 2006 Dec;103(3):879-82
references.pmid: 17326517
references.citation: Nat Neurosci. 2002 Nov;5(11):1226-35
references.pmid: 12404008
references.citation: Science. 2007 Oct 5;318(5847):107-9
references.pmid: 17916736
references.citation: Behav Brain Res. 2008 Jul 19;190(2):218-23
references.pmid: 18406476
references.citation: J Neurosci Methods. 2009 Jul 30;181(2):199-211
references.pmid: 19450621
references.citation: Science. 1981 Mar 27;211(4489):1390-6
references.pmid: 7466396
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1950 Jan;36(1):48-9
references.pmid: 16588946
references.citation: Science. 2006 Dec 8;314(5805):1560-3
references.pmid: 17158317
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 2003 Jan;89(1):168-76
references.pmid: 12522169
references.citation: Nature. 1993 Jul 1;364(6432):56-8
references.pmid: 8316296
references.citation: Nature. 2007 Aug 30;448(7157):1046-9
references.pmid: 17728757
references.citation: J Theor Biol. 2007 Mar 21;245(2):258-67
references.pmid: 17125798
references.citation: Nature. 2005 Jan 6;433(7021):1 p following 32; discussion following 32
references.pmid: 15637787
references.citation: Proc Biol Sci. 2003 Nov 7;270(1530):2279-83
references.pmid: 14613615
references.citation: Science. 2005 Apr 1;308(5718):78-83
references.pmid: 15802598
references.citation: Curr Biol. 2007 Oct 9;17(19):1675-9
references.pmid: 17900901
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1952 Oct;38(10):886-93
references.pmid: 16589195
references.citation: Science. 2007 Oct 26;318(5850):598-602
references.pmid: 17962552
references.citation: Cogn Psychol. 1992 Oct;24(4):449-74
references.pmid: 1473331
references.citation: Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 2005 Oct;25(2):416-30
references.pmid: 16095886
references.citation: Am J Psychol. 2005 Fall;118(3):431-57
references.pmid: 16255128
references.citation: Science. 2002 Dec 13;298(5601):2216-8
references.pmid: 12481142
references.citation: Nature. 2004 Apr 15;428(6984):745-8
references.pmid: 15085131
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1952 Feb;38(2):121-6
references.pmid: 16589065
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998 Nov 10;95(23):13755-8
references.pmid: 9811873
references.citation: Nature. 2008 Oct 16;455(7215):964-6
references.pmid: 18923522
references.citation: Behav Brain Sci. 2003 Apr;26(2):139-53; discussion 153-98
references.pmid: 14621510
references.citation: Prog Brain Res. 2007;165:425-45
references.pmid: 17925262
references.citation: Nature. 2002 Jul 11;418(6894):171-4
references.pmid: 12110887