Abstract

Cooperative behavior, where one individual incurs a cost to help another, is a wide spread phenomenon. Here we study direct reciprocity in the context of the alternating Prisoner's Dilemma. We consider all strategies that can be implemented by one and two-state automata. We calculate the payoff matrix of all pairwise encounters in the presence of noise. We explore deterministic selection dynamics with and without mutation. Using different error rates and payoff values, we observe convergence to a small number of distinct equilibria. Two of them are uncooperative strict Nash equilibria representing always-defect (ALLD) and Grim. The third equilibrium is mixed and represents a cooperative alliance of several strategies, dominated by a strategy which we call Forgiver. Forgiver cooperates whenever the opponent has cooperated; it defects once when the opponent has defected, but subsequently Forgiver attempts to re-establish cooperation even if the opponent has defected again. Forgiver is not an evolutionarily stable strategy, but the alliance, which it rules, is asymptotically stable. For a wide range of parameter values the most commonly observed outcome is convergence to the mixed equilibrium, dominated by Forgiver. Our results show that although forgiving might incur a short-term loss it can lead to a long-term gain. Forgiveness facilitates stable cooperation in the presence of exploitation and noise.

Highlights

  • A cooperative dilemma arises when two cooperators receive a higher payoff than two defectors and yet there is an incentive to defect [1,2]

  • At first we study the case b~3 with error rate E~0:05 and an average game length of L~100

  • We find that ALLD (S1) and Grim (S17) are the only strict Nash equilibria among the 26 pure strategies

Read more

Summary

Introduction

A cooperative dilemma arises when two cooperators receive a higher payoff than two defectors and yet there is an incentive to defect [1,2]. A mechanism is an interaction structure that specifies how individuals interact to receive payoff and how they compete for reproduction. Direct reciprocity is a mechanism for the evolution of cooperation. The standard theory assumes that both players decide simultaneously what do for the round. Another possibility is that the players take turns when making their moves [38,39,40]. This implementation can lead to a strictly alternating game, where the players always choose their moves in turns, or to a stochastically alternating game, where in each round the player to move is chosen at randomnext is selected probabilistically.

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.