Learning Collective Dynamics with Differentiable Gaussian Representations

Dynamic Population Games (DPGs) provide a tractable framework for modeling strategic interactions in large populations of self-interested agents, and have been successfully applied to the design of Karma economies, a class of fair non-monetary resource allocation mechanisms. Despite their appealing theoretical properties, existing computational tools for DPGs assume full knowledge of the game model and operate in a centralized fashion, limiting their applicability in realistic settings where agents have access only to their own private experience. This paper takes a step towards addressing this gap by studying model-free equilibrium learning in Karma DPGs. First, we analyze the setting in which a novel agent joins a Karma DPG already at its Stationary Nash Equilibrium (SNE) and learns a policy via Deep Q-Networks (DQN) without knowledge of the game model. Leveraging recent convergence results for DQN, we establish a suboptimality bound consisting of a DQN approximation error of order $O(1/\sqrt{N_s})$ and a mean field perturbation error of order $O(1/N)$, where $N_s$ is the replay buffer size and $N$ is the population size. Second, we consider the challenging problem of learning the SNE from scratch. We show empirically that combining deep RL with fictitious play and smoothed policy iteration allows agents to converge, in a model-free fashion, to a configuration close to the centrally computed SNE. Together, these contributions support the vision of Karma economies as practical tools for fair resource allocation.

Existing AI systems for modeling human behavior operate at the level of individuals or detect events after they occur. As a result, they systematically fail to capture the collective dynamics that determine whether a group remains stable or transitions into escalation or breakdown. We propose a different foundation: a group of interacting humans constitutes a complex dynamical system in the precise mathematical sense, exhibiting emergence, nonlinearity, feedback loops, sensitivity near critical points, and phase transitions between qualitatively distinct regimes. The state of such a system is not located within any single participant; it is distributed across mutual influence loops and observable through the micro-dynamics of the body. We introduce BEHAVE (Behavioral Engine for Human Activity Vector Estimation), a formal framework that models collective dynamics as continuous behavioral fields defined over an interaction space derived from observable physical signals. Kinematic micro-signals (position, velocity, body orientation, gestural activity) are structured into a directed interaction graph and aggregated into a basis of behavioral fields capturing distinct, non-redundant axes of collective state. The framework rests on one theorem and two structural propositions characterizing the tension field, the field basis, and the criticality index. Perception and forecasting layers are implemented using neural models, enabling data-driven learning and approximation of system dynamics. BEHAVE is formulated as a computational system for learning, representing, and forecasting collective dynamics from data. A working pipeline is demonstrated on a 7-agent negotiation snapshot. The same fields, recalibrated, apply to crowd safety, crisis-team dynamics, education, and clinical contexts.

We develop a first-principles reduced-order model of these dynamics. Under a single mean-field assumption that summarizes the policy by its expected reward, we reduce the GRPO update to a stochastically-forced damped oscillator whose mass, damping, and stiffness are fixed in closed form by the optimizer hyperparameters together with a single measured curvature scale -- momentum supplies the inertia, off-policy lag erodes the damping, and the group size enters, to leading order, as a noise temperature. The reduction has three consequences. First, it subsumes the empirical single-exponential saturation law as its overdamped limit, recasting the fitted plateau, timescale, and size exponent as the fixed point, inverse stiffness, and curvature-scaling exponent of the underlying potential, and adding, through the retained inertial term, the slow-start phase the single exponential cannot represent. Second, it yields predictions tied to independently measurable quantities rather than fitted ones: group-size invariance of the deterministic trajectory with a $1/G$ stationary fluctuation, a sharp stability threshold in the refresh interval, and an overdamped-to-oscillatory transition. Third, it furnishes diagnostics that separate failure modes a reward curve alone conflates -- reward hacking, advantage degeneracy, policy concentration, and dynamical instability. Across three models and two group sizes, the closed-form trajectory fits training reward to $R^2 \geq 0.91$ and the mean trajectory is group-size invariant to leading order -- on both the reward curve and out-of-distribution transfer to eight math benchmarks -- while the within-group reward spread retains a residual $G$-dependence that the leading-order temperature picture does not capture.