Counterfactual Reasoning for Causal Responsibility Attribution in Probabilistic Multi-Agent Systems

Chunyan Mu, Muhammad Najib
5/13/2026
cs.MAcs.AI

No confident code implementation found for this paper.

Abstract

Responsibility allocation -- determining the extent to which agents are accountable for outcomes -- is a fundamental challenge in the design and analysis of multi-agent systems. In this work, we model such systems as concurrent stochastic multi-player games and introduce a notion of retrospective (backward) counterfactual responsibility, which quantifies an agent's accountability for outcomes resulting from a given strategy profile. To allocate responsibility among agents, we utilise the Shapley value and formally show that this method satisfies key desirable properties, including fairness and consistency. Building on this foundation, we propose a formal framework that supports both verification and strategic reasoning in responsibility-aware multi-agent systems. Furthermore, by adopting Nash equilibrium as the solution concept, we demonstrate how to compute stable strategy profiles in which agents trade off responsibility against expected reward.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. Any repos shown below are weak matches — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{mu2026counterfactual,
  title  = {Counterfactual Reasoning for Causal Responsibility Attribution in Probabilistic Multi-Agent Systems},
  author = {Chunyan Mu and Muhammad Najib},
  year   = {2026},
  eprint = {2605.13077},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.13077v1}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2605.13077.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2605.13077)

Discussion