Experimental evaluation of cognitive agents for collaboration in human-autonomy cyber defense teams

Autonomous agents are becoming increasingly prevalent and capable of collaborating with humans on interdependent tasks as teammates. There is increasing recognition that human-like agents might be natural human collaborators. However, there has been limited work on designing agents according to the principles of human cognition or in empirically testing their teamwork effectiveness. In this study, we introduce the Team Defense Game (TDG), a novel experimental platform for investigating human-autonomy teaming in cyber defense scenarios. We design an agent that relies on episodic memory to determine its actions ( Cognitive agent ) and compare its effectiveness with two types of autonomous agents: one that relies on heuristic reasoning ( Heuristic agent ) and one that behaves randomly ( Random agent ). These agents are compared in a human-autonomy team (HAT) performing a cyber-protection task in the TDG. We systematically evaluate how autonomous teammates’ abilities and competence impact the team’s interaction and outcomes. The results revealed that teams with Cognitive agents are the most effective partners, followed by teams with Heuristic and Random agents. Evaluation of collaborative team process metrics suggests that the cognitive agent is more adaptive to individual play styles of human teammates, but it is also inconsistent and less predictable than the Heuristic agent. Competent agents (Cognitive and Heuristic agents) require less human effort but might cause over-reliance. A post-experiment questionnaire showed that competent agents are rated more trustworthy and cooperative than Random agents. We also found that human participants’ subjective ratings correlate with their team performance, and humans tend to take the credit or responsibility for the team. Our work advances HAT research by providing empirical evidence of how the design of different autonomous agents (cognitive, heuristic, and random) affect team performance and dynamics in cybersecurity contexts. We propose that autonomous agents for HATs should possess both competence and human-like cognition while also ensuring predictable behavior or clear explanations to maintain human trust. Additionally, they should proactively seek human input to enhance teamwork effectiveness.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Computers in Human Behavior Artificial Humans
Published
2025-04-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100148
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
9.75
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Experimental evaluation of cognitive agents for collaboration in human-autonomy cyber defense teams

Tyler Malloy, Fei Fang, Baptiste Prébot, Cleotilde González et al.
4 citations
Computers in Human Behavior Artificial Humans
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
9.75
article

Experimental evaluation of cognitive agents for collaboration in human-autonomy cyber defense teams

Tyler Malloy, Fei Fang, Baptiste Prébot, Cleotilde González, Yinuo Du
article en
4 citations

Abstract

Autonomous agents are becoming increasingly prevalent and capable of collaborating with humans on interdependent tasks as teammates. There is increasing recognition that human-like agents might be natural human collaborators. However, there has been limited work on designing agents according to the principles of human cognition or in empirically testing their teamwork effectiveness. In this study, we introduce the Team Defense Game (TDG), a novel experimental platform for investigating human-autonomy teaming in cyber defense scenarios. We design an agent that relies on episodic memory to determine its actions ( Cognitive agent ) and compare its effectiveness with two types of autonomous agents: one that relies on heuristic reasoning ( Heuristic agent ) and one that behaves randomly ( Random agent ). These agents are compared in a human-autonomy team (HAT) performing a cyber-protection task in the TDG. We systematically evaluate how autonomous teammates’ abilities and competence impact the team’s interaction and outcomes. The results revealed that teams with Cognitive agents are the most effective partners, followed by teams with Heuristic and Random agents. Evaluation of collaborative team process metrics suggests that the cognitive agent is more adaptive to individual play styles of human teammates, but it is also inconsistent and less predictable than the Heuristic agent. Competent agents (Cognitive and Heuristic agents) require less human effort but might cause over-reliance. A post-experiment questionnaire showed that competent agents are rated more trustworthy and cooperative than Random agents. We also found that human participants’ subjective ratings correlate with their team performance, and humans tend to take the credit or responsibility for the team. Our work advances HAT research by providing empirical evidence of how the design of different autonomous agents (cognitive, heuristic, and random) affect team performance and dynamics in cybersecurity contexts. We propose that autonomous agents for HATs should possess both competence and human-like cognition while also ensuring predictable behavior or clear explanations to maintain human trust. Additionally, they should proactively seek human input to enhance teamwork effectiveness.

Computers in Human Behavior Artificial HumansVol. 4
Software Engineering Institute (US), Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
9.75
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.