N-person Prisoner Research Articles

Equilibria analysis in social dilemma games with Skinnerian agents

Different disciplines have analyzed binary choices to model collective behavior in human systems. Several situations in which social dilemma arise can be modeled as N-person prisoner’s dilemma games including homeland security, public goods, international political economy among others. The purpose of this study is to develop an analytical solution to the N-person prisoner’s dilemma game when boundedly rational agents interact in a population. Previous studies in the literature consider the case in which cooperators and defectors have the same learning factors. We obtain an analytical equation to find equilibria in the N-person prisoner’s dilemma game in the general case when agents have different learning factors. We also introduce a more realistic approach where probability values are bounded between zero and one and therefore eliminates the possibility of infeasible probability values. Since no analytic solution can be derived in this case, agent based simulation is used to analyze the asymptotic behavior of the resulted dynamical system.

Bipartite Graphs as Models of Population Structures in Evolutionary Multiplayer Games

By combining evolutionary game theory and graph theory, “games on graphs” study the evolutionary dynamics of frequency-dependent selection in population structures modeled as geographical or social networks. Networks are usually represented by means of unipartite graphs, and social interactions by two-person games such as the famous prisoner’s dilemma. Unipartite graphs have also been used for modeling interactions going beyond pairwise interactions. In this paper, we argue that bipartite graphs are a better alternative to unipartite graphs for describing population structures in evolutionary multiplayer games. To illustrate this point, we make use of bipartite graphs to investigate, by means of computer simulations, the evolution of cooperation under the conventional and the distributed N-person prisoner’s dilemma. We show that several implicit assumptions arising from the standard approach based on unipartite graphs (such as the definition of replacement neighborhoods, the intertwining of individual and group diversity, and the large overlap of interaction neighborhoods) can have a large impact on the resulting evolutionary dynamics. Our work provides a clear example of the importance of construction procedures in games on graphs, of the suitability of bigraphs and hypergraphs for computational modeling, and of the importance of concepts from social network analysis such as centrality, centralization and bipartite clustering for the understanding of dynamical processes occurring on networked population structures.

Voluntary Human Engineering, Climate Change, and N-Person Prisoners Dilemmas

I agree with Liao et al. (2012) that anthropogenic global climate change (AGCC) is an urgent problem, and I am inclined to agree with them that we should take seriously the possibility of human eng...

Altruistic punishment and between-group competition : evidence from n-person prisoner's dilemmas.

Collective action, or the large-scale cooperation in the pursuit of public goods, has been suggested to have evolved through cultural group selection. Previous research suggests that the costly punishment of group members who do not contribute to public goods plays an important role in the resolution of collective action dilemmas. If large-scale cooperation sustained by the punishment of defectors has evolved through the mechanism of cultural group selection, two implications regarding costly punishment follow: (1) that people are more willing to punish defecting group members in a situation of intergroup competition than in a single-group social dilemma game and (2) that levels of “perverse” punishment of cooperators are not affected by intergroup competition. We find confirmation for these hypotheses. However, we find that the effect of intergroup competition on the punishment of defectors is fully explained by the stronger conditionality of punishment on expected punishment levels in the competition condition.

Emergence of Fairness in Repeated Group Interactions

Often groups need to meet repeatedly before a decision is reached. Hence, most individual decisions will be contingent on decisions taken previously by others. In particular, the decision to cooperate or not will depend on one's own assessment of what constitutes a fair group outcome. Making use of a repeated N-person prisoner's dilemma, we show that reciprocation towards groups opens a window of opportunity for cooperation to thrive, leading populations to engage in dynamics involving both coordination and coexistence, and characterized by cycles of cooperation and defection. Furthermore, we show that this process leads to the emergence of fairness, whose level will depend on the dilemma at stake.

Universals, Knowledge Claims, and Methods

Research Article| July 01 2011 Universals, Knowledge Claims, and Methods Joe Oppenheimer Joe Oppenheimer Joe Oppenheimer has written extensively on issues of social justice and rational choice theory. His latest works include three co-authored articles in the Journal of Politics reinterpreting all behavioral results in n-person prisoner dilemma games and Political Principles: A Rational Choice Theory Guide to Politics and Social Welfare. Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google The Good Society (2011) 20 (2): 249–280. https://doi.org/10.5325/goodsociety.20.2.0249 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Permissions Search Site Citation Joe Oppenheimer; Universals, Knowledge Claims, and Methods. The Good Society 1 July 2011; 20 (2): 249–280. doi: https://doi.org/10.5325/goodsociety.20.2.0249 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All Scholarly Publishing CollectivePenn State University PressThe Good Society Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. Copyright © 2012 The Pennsylvania State University2012The Pennsylvania State University Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Review: Game theory of public goods in one-shot social dilemmas without assortment

We review the theory of public goods in biology. In the N-person prisoner's dilemma, where the public good is a linear function of the individual contributions, cooperation requires some form of assortment, for example due to kin discrimination, population viscosity or repeated interactions. In most social species ranging from bacteria to humans, however, public goods are usually a non-linear function of the contributions, which makes cooperation possible without assortment. More specifically, a polymorphic state can be stable in which cooperators and non-cooperators coexist. The existence of mixed equilibria in public goods games is a fundamental result in the study of cooperation that has been overlooked so far, because of the disproportionate attention given to the two- and N-person prisoner's dilemma. Methods and results from games with pairwise interactions or linear benefits cannot, in general, be extended to the analysis of public goods. Game theory helps explain the production of public goods in one-shot, N-person interactions without assortment, it leads to predictions that can be easily tested and allows a prescriptive approach to cooperation.

COEXISTENCE OF COOPERATION AND DEFECTION IN PUBLIC GOODS GAMES

The production of public goods by the contribution of individual volunteers is a social dilemma because an individual that does not volunteer can benefit from the public good produced by the contributions of others. Therefore it is generally believed that public goods can be produced only in the presence of repeated interactions (which allow reciprocation, reputation effects and punishment) or relatedness (kin selection). Cooperation, however, often occurs in the absence of iterations and relatedness. We show that when the production of a public good is a Volunteer's Dilemma, in which a fixed number of cooperators is necessary to produce the public good, cooperators and defectors persist in a mixed equilibrium, without iterations and without relatedness. This mixed equilibrium is absent in the N-person Prisoner's Dilemma, in which the public good is a linear function of the individual contributions. We also show that the Prisoner's Dilemma and the Volunteer's Dilemma are the two opposite extremes of a general public goods game, and that all intermediate cases can have a mixed equilibrium like the Volunteer's Dilemma. The coexistence of cooperators and defectors, therefore, is a typical outcome of most social dilemmas, which requires neither relatedness nor iterations.

Revisiting “The Evolution of Reciprocity in Sizable Groups”: Continuous reciprocity in the repeated n-person prisoner's dilemma

For many years in evolutionary science, the consensus view has been that while reciprocal altruism can evolve in dyadic interactions, it is unlikely to evolve in sizable groups. This view had been based on studies which have assumed cooperation to be discrete rather than continuous (i.e., individuals can either fully cooperate or else fully defect, but they cannot continuously vary their level of cooperation). In real world cooperation, however, cooperation is often continuous. In this paper, we re-examine the evolution of reciprocity in sizable groups by presenting a model of the n-person prisoner's dilemma that assumes continuous rather than discrete cooperation. This model shows that continuous reciprocity has a dramatically wider basin of attraction than discrete reciprocity, and that this basin's size increases with efficiency of cooperation (marginal per capita return). Further, we find that assortative interaction interacts synergistically with continuous reciprocity to a much greater extent than it does with discrete reciprocity. These results suggest that previous models may have underestimated reciprocity's adaptiveness in groups. However, we also find that the invasion of continuous reciprocators into a population of unconditional defectors becomes realistic only within a narrow parameter space in which the efficiency of cooperation is close to its maximum bound. Therefore our model suggests that continuous reciprocity can evolve in large groups more easily than discrete reciprocity only under unusual circumstances.

Climate change, economics and hope: a comment on Brennan

Climate change, economics and hope: a comment on Brennan

Cooperation as a volunteer’s dilemma and the strategy of conflict in public goods games

Conflict and cooperation for the exploitation of public goods are usually modelled as an N-person prisoner's dilemma. Many social dilemmas, however, would be described more properly as a volunteer's dilemma, in which a certain number of individuals are necessary to produce a public good. If volunteering is costly, but so is failure to produce the public good, cheaters can invade and form a stable mixed equilibrium with cooperators. The dilemma is that the benefit for the group decreases with group size because the larger the group is, the less likely it is that someone volunteers. This problem persists even in the presence of a high degree of relatedness between group members. This model provides precise, testable predictions for the stability of cooperation. It also suggests a counterintuitive but practical solution for this kind of social dilemmas: increasing the damage resulting from the failure to produce the public good increases the probability that the public good is actually produced. Adopting a strategy that entails a deliberate risk (brinkmanship), therefore, can lead to a benefit for the society without being detrimental for the individual.

Chaos, oscillation and the evolution of indirect reciprocity in n-person games

Evolution of cooperation among genetically unrelated individuals has been of considerable concern in various fields such as biology, economics, and psychology. The evolution of cooperation is often explained by reciprocity. Under reciprocity, cooperation can prevail in a society because a donor of cooperation receives reciprocation from the recipient of the cooperation, called direct reciprocity, or from someone else in the community, called indirect reciprocity. Nowak and Sigmund [1993. Chaos and the evolution of cooperation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 90, 5091–5094] have demonstrated that directly reciprocal cooperation in two-person prisoner's dilemma games with mutation of strategies can be maintained dynamically as periodic or chaotic oscillation. Furthermore, Eriksson and Lindgren [2005. Cooperation driven by mutations in multi-person Prisoner's Dilemma. J. Theor. Biol. 232, 399–409] have reported that directly reciprocal cooperation in n-person prisoner's dilemma games (n>2) can be maintained as periodic oscillation. Is dynamic cooperation observed only in direct reciprocity? Results of this study show that indirectly reciprocal cooperation in n-person prisoner's dilemma games can be maintained dynamically as periodic or chaotic oscillation. This is, to our knowledge, the first demonstration of chaos in indirect reciprocity. Furthermore, the results show that oscillatory dynamics are observed in common in the evolution of reciprocal cooperation whether for direct or indirect.

Punishing free riders: direct and indirect promotion of cooperation

Human cooperation in a large group of genetically unrelated people is an evolutionary puzzle. Despite its costly nature, cooperative behavior is commonly found in all human societies—a fact that has interested researchers from a wide range of disciplines, including biology, economics, and psychology, to name a few. Many behavioral experiments have demonstrated that cooperation within a group can be sustained when free riders are punished. We argue that punishment has both a direct effect and an indirect effect on promoting cooperation. The direct effect of punishment alters the consequences of cooperation and defection in such a way as to make a rational person prefer cooperation. The indirect effect of punishment promotes cooperation among conditional cooperators by providing the condition necessary for their cooperation (i.e., the expectation that other members will also cooperate). Here we present data from two one-shot n-person prisoner's dilemma games, demonstrating that the indirect effect of punishment complements the direct effect to increase cooperation in the game. Furthermore, we show that direct and indirect effects are robust across two forms of punishment technology: either when punishment is voluntarily provided by game players themselves or when it is exogenously provided by the experimenter.

Relationship between Norm-internalization and Cooperation in N-person Prisoners' Dilemma Games

In this paper, I discuss the problems of ``order in social situations'' using a computer simulation of iterated N-person prisoners' dilemma game. It has been claimed that, in the case of the 2-person prisoners' dilemma, repetition of games and the reciprocal use of the ``tit-for-tat'' strategy promote the possibility of cooperation. However, in cases of N-person prisoners' dilemma where N is greater than 2, the logic does not work effectively. The most essential problem is so called ``sanctioning problems''. In this paper, firstly, I discuss the ``sanctioning problems'' which were introduced by Axelrod and Keohane in 1986. Based on the model formalized by Axelrod, I propose a new model, in which I added a mechanism of players' payoff changes in the Axelrod's model. I call this mechanism norm-internalization and call our model ``norm-internalization game''. Second, by using the model, I investigated the relationship between agents' norm-internalization (payoff-alternation) and the possibilities of cooperation. The results of computer simulation indicated that unequal distribution of cooperating norm and uniform distribution of sanctioning norm are more effective in establishing cooperation. I discuss the mathematical features and the implications of the results on social science.

Embedding social dilemmas in intergroup competition reduces free-riding

We study a class of multi-level collective actions, in which each individual is simultaneously engaged in an intragroup conflict and intergroup competition. The intragroup conflict is modeled as an n-person Prisoner’s Dilemma game, in which the dominant strategy is to contribute nothing. The intergroup competition is for an exogenous and commonly known prize shared by members of the winning group. We focus on the effects on the level of contribution of the two most common sharing rules for dividing the prize, equal and proportional. Our results show that (1) embedding the intragroup conflict in intergroup competition markedly reduces free riding; (2) the proportional profit sharing rule significantly outperforms the egalitarian rule, and the difference between the two increases with experience; (3) under egalitarian but not under proportional sharing, there is over-contribution compared to theoretical predictions, and (4) a simple reinforcement-based learning model accounts for the aggregate results of all five experimental conditions.

Farsighted Stability in an n-Person Prisoner’s Dilemma

Farsighted stability is examined in an n-person prisoner’s dilemma. It is shown that any individually rational and Pareto efficient outcome is a farsighted stable set and no other farsighted stable set exists; it is further shown that the largest consistent set consists of all individually rational outcomes.

The supercore for normal-form games

This paper analyzes the supercore of a system derived from a normal-form game. For the case of a finite game with pure strategies, we define a sequence of games and show that the supercore coincides with the set of Nash equilibria of the last game in that sequence. This result is illustrated with the characterization of the supercore for the n-person prisoner's dilemma. With regard to the mixed extension of a normal-form game, we show that the set of Nash equilibrium profiles coincides with the supercore for games with a finite number of Nash equilibria.

Emergence of Cooperative Internet Server Sharing Among Internet Search Agents Caught in the n-Person Prisoner’s Dilemma Game

Information on the Internet can be collected by autonomous agents that send out queries to the servers that may have the information sought. From a single agent’s perspective, sending out as many queries as possible maximizes the chances of finding the information sought. However, if every agent does the same, the servers will be overloaded. The first major contribution of this paper is proving mathematically that the agents situated in such environments play the n-Person Prisoner’s Dilemma Game. The second is mathematically deriving the notion of effectiveness of cooperation among the agents in such environments and then presenting the optimal interval for the number of information sites for a given number of information-seeking agents. When the optimal interval is satisfied, cooperation among agents is effective, meaning that resources (e.g., servers) are optimally shared. Experimental results suggest that agents can better share available servers through the kinship-based cooperation without explicitly knowing about the entire environment. This paper also identifies difficulties of promoting cooperation in such environments and presents possible solutions. The long-term goal of this research is to elucidate the understanding of massively distributed multiagent environments such as the Internet and to identify valuable design principles of software agents in similar environments.

Cooperation driven by mutations in multi-person Prisoner's Dilemma

The n-person Prisoner's Dilemma is a widely used model for populations where individuals interact in groups. The evolutionary stability of populations has been analysed in the literature for the case where mutations in the population may be considered as isolated events. For this case, and assuming simple trigger strategies and many iterations per game, we analyse the rate of convergence to the evolutionarily stable populations. We find that for some values of the payoff parameters of the Prisoner's Dilemma this rate is so low that the assumption, that mutations in the population are infrequent on that time-scale, is unreasonable. Furthermore, the problem is compounded as the group size is increased. In order to address this issue, we derive a deterministic approximation of the evolutionary dynamics with explicit, stochastic mutation processes, valid when the population size is large. We then analyse how the evolutionary dynamics depends on the following factors: mutation rate, group size, the value of the payoff parameters, and the structure of the initial population. In order to carry out the simulations for groups of more than just a few individuals, we derive an efficient way of calculating the fitness values. We find that when the mutation rate per individual and generation is very low, the dynamics is characterized by populations which are evolutionarily stable. As the mutation rate is increased, other fixed points with a higher degree of cooperation become stable. For some values of the payoff parameters, the system is characterized by (apparently) stable limit cycles dominated by cooperative behaviour. The parameter regions corresponding to high degree of cooperation grow in size with the mutation rate, and in number with the group size. For some parameter values, we find more than one stable fixed point, corresponding to different structures of the initial population.

Punishment strategies make the ?-coalitional game ordinally convex and balanced

We present a sufficient condition under which the α-coalitional game associated with a strategic form game is ordinally convex and balanced. The n-person prisoners’ dilemma games satisfy this condition.