For the science of autonomous human-machine systems, traditional causal-time interpretations of reality in known contexts are sufficient for rational decisions and actions to be taken, but not for uncertain or dynamic contexts, nor for building the best teams. First, unlike game theory where the contexts are constructed for players, or machine learning where contexts must be stable, when facing uncertainty or conflict, a rational process is insufficient for decisions or actions to be taken; second, as supported by the literature, rational explanations cannot disaggregate human-machine teams. In the first case, interdependent humans facing uncertainty spontaneously engage in debate over complementary tradeoffs in a search for the best path forward, characterized by maximum entropy production (MEP); however, in the second case, signified by a reduction in structural entropy production (SEP), interdependent team structures make it rationally impossible to discern what creates better teams. In our review of evidence for SEP-MEP complementarity for teams, we found that structural redundancy for top global oil producers, replicated for top global militaries, impedes interdependence and promotes corruption. Next, using UN data for Middle Eastern North African nations plus Israel, we found that a nation's structure of education is significantly associated with MEP by the number of patents it produces; this conflicts with our earlier finding that a U.S. Air Force education in air combat maneuvering was not associated with the best performance in air combat, but air combat flight training was. These last two results exemplify that SEP-MEP interactions by the team's best members are made by orthogonal contributions. We extend our theory to find that competition between teams hinges on vulnerability, a complementary excess of SEP and reduced MEP, which generalizes to autonomous human-machine systems.
Keywords: autonomy; complementarity; entropy; human–machine systems; interdependence.