Fair-GNE : Generalized Nash Equilibrium-Seeking Fairness in Multiagent Healthcare Automation

Enforcing a fair workload allocation among multiple agents tasked to achieve an objective in learning enabled demand side healthcare worker settings is crucial for consistent and reliable performance at runtime. Existing multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL) approaches steer fairness by shaping reward through post hoc orchestrations, leaving no certifiable self-enforceable fairness that is immutable by individual agents at runtime. Contextualized within a setting where each agent shares resources with others, we address this shortcoming with a learning enabled optimization scheme among self-interested decision makers whose individual actions affect those of other agents. This extends the problem to a generalized Nash equilibrium (GNE) game-theoretic framework where we steer group policy to a safe and locally efficient equilibrium, so that no agent can improve its utility function by unilaterally changing its decisions. Fair-GNE models MARL as a constrained generalized Nash equilibrium-seeking (GNE) game, prescribing an ideal equitable collective equilibrium within the problem's natural fabric. Our hypothesis is rigorously evaluated in our custom-designed high-fidelity resuscitation simulator. Across all our numerical experiments, Fair-GNE achieves significant improvement in workload balance over fixed-penalty baselines (0.89 vs.\ 0.33 JFI, $p < 0.01$) while maintaining 86\% task success, demonstrating statistically significant fairness gains through adaptive constraint enforcement. Our results communicate our formulations, evaluation metrics, and equilibrium-seeking innovations in large multi-agent learning-based healthcare systems with clarity and principled fairness enforcement.

Human-Robot Teaming Field Deployments: A Comparison Between Verbal and Non-verbal Communication

Healthcare workers (HCWs) encounter challenges in hospitals, such as retrieving medical supplies quickly from crash carts, which could potentially result in medical errors and delays in patient care. Robotic crash carts (RCCs) have shown promise in assisting healthcare teams during medical tasks through guided object searches and task reminders. Limited exploration has been done to determine what communication modalities are most effective and least disruptive to patient care in real-world settings. To address this gap, we conducted a between-subjects experiment comparing the RCC's verbal and non-verbal communication of object search with a standard crash cart in resuscitation scenarios to understand the impact of robot communication on workload and attitudes toward using robots in the workplace. Our findings indicate that verbal communication significantly reduced mental demand and effort compared to visual cues and with a traditional crash cart. Although frustration levels were slightly higher during collaborations with the robot compared to a traditional cart, these research insights provide valuable implications for human-robot teamwork in high-stakes environments.