IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/apmaco/v282y2016icp117-127.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Iterated symmetric three-player prisoner’s dilemma game

Author

Listed:
  • El-Seidy, Essam
  • Soliman, Karim.M.

Abstract

Although, most game theory researches on the prisoner’s dilemma have centered on two-player models, it is possible to create it to be consisted of three or even more players. In this paper, we are interested in the model of three-player iterated prisoner’s dilemma game where, each player has two choices. The action of each strategy in this model depends on the previous action of the last round. Each strategy is presented by finite state of automata. We used a computer program to calculate the payoff values resulting from the actions of all possible strategies. We study the behavior of four different strategies related to Tit for Tat concept. The conditions of each strategy to be the best are determined. In Appendix section, we design an algorithm and implement it using the Java programing language to facilitate the calculations.

Suggested Citation

  • El-Seidy, Essam & Soliman, Karim.M., 2016. "Iterated symmetric three-player prisoner’s dilemma game," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 282(C), pages 117-127.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:apmaco:v:282:y:2016:i:c:p:117-127
    DOI: 10.1016/j.amc.2016.02.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0096300316301011
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.amc.2016.02.009?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andreoni, James A & Miller, John H, 1993. "Rational Cooperation in the Finitely Repeated Prisoner's Dilemma: Experimental Evidence," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 103(418), pages 570-585, May.
    2. Matjaž Perc & Zhen Wang, 2010. "Heterogeneous Aspirations Promote Cooperation in the Prisoner's Dilemma Game," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(12), pages 1-8, December.
    3. Imhof, Lorens & Nowak, Martin & Fudenberg, Drew, 2007. "Tit-for-Tat or Win-Stay, Lose-Shift?," Scholarly Articles 3200671, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    4. Friedman, Daniel, 1991. "Evolutionary Games in Economics," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(3), pages 637-666, May.
    5. Hammerstein, Peter & Selten, Reinhard, 1994. "Game theory and evolutionary biology," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, in: R.J. Aumann & S. Hart (ed.), Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 28, pages 929-993, Elsevier.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. EL-Seidy, Essam & Elshobaky, Entisarat.M. & Soliman, Karim.M., 2016. "Two population three-player prisoner’s dilemma game," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 277(C), pages 44-53.
    2. El-Salam, Salsabeel M. Abd & El-Seidy, Essam & Abdel-Malek, Amira R., 2023. "Evaluating zero-determinant strategies’ effects on cooperation and conflict resolution in repeated games," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    3. Taha, Mohammad A. & Ghoneim, Ayman, 2021. "Zero-determinant strategies in infinitely repeated three-player prisoner's dilemma game," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. EL-Seidy, Essam & Elshobaky, Entisarat.M. & Soliman, Karim.M., 2016. "Two population three-player prisoner’s dilemma game," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 277(C), pages 44-53.
    2. Morrison, William G., 1996. "Instincts as reflex choice: Does loss of temper have strategic value?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 335-356, December.
    3. Ochea, Marius-Ionut, 2013. "Evolution of repeated prisoner's dilemma play under logit dynamics," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 2483-2499.
    4. Li, Ye & Yang, Tianjian & Zhang, Yu, 2022. "Evolutionary game theory-based system dynamics modeling for community solid waste classification in China," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    5. Elvio Accinelli & Juan Gabriel Brida & Edgar Carrera & Lionello Punzo, 2006. "Dinámica evolutiva en un modelo de interacción entre visitantes y residentes de una localidad turística," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 1606, Department of Economics - dECON.
    6. Weibull, Jörgen W., 1997. "What have we learned from Evolutionary Game Theory so far?," Working Paper Series 487, Research Institute of Industrial Economics, revised 26 Oct 1998.
    7. Brosig, Jeannette, 2002. "Identifying cooperative behavior: some experimental results in a prisoner's dilemma game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 275-290, March.
    8. Vogt, Carsten, 2000. "The evolution of cooperation in Prisoners' Dilemma with an endogenous learning mutant," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 347-373, July.
    9. Wang, JunFang & Guo, JinLi, 2019. "A synergy of punishment and extortion in cooperation dilemmas driven by the leader," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 263-268.
    10. Hoffler, Felix, 1999. "Some play fair, some don't: Reciprocal fairness in a stylized principal-agent problem," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 113-131, January.
    11. Qianru Chen & Hualin Xie & Qunli Zhai, 2022. "Management Policy of Farmers’ Cultivated Land Abandonment Behavior Based on Evolutionary Game and Simulation Analysis," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-23, February.
    12. Lichi Zhang & Yanyan Jiang & Junmin Wu, 2022. "Evolutionary Game Analysis of Government and Residents’ Participation in Waste Separation Based on Cumulative Prospect Theory," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-16, November.
    13. Markus C. Arnold & Eva Ponick, 2006. "Kommunikation im Groves-Mechanismus — Ergebnisse eines Laborexperiments," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 58(1), pages 89-120, February.
    14. Kamei, Kenju, 2016. "Information Disclosure and Cooperation in a Finitely-repeated Dilemma: Experimental Evidence," MPRA Paper 75100, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Wang Mingbao & Du Zhiping & Duan Hong, 2017. "Study on Participant Behavior Game of Electronic Products Reverse Supply Chain Based on ECP," Journal of Systems Science and Information, De Gruyter, vol. 5(5), pages 411-434, October.
    16. Mahmoud Mahfouz & Angelos Filos & Cyrine Chtourou & Joshua Lockhart & Samuel Assefa & Manuela Veloso & Danilo Mandic & Tucker Balch, 2019. "On the Importance of Opponent Modeling in Auction Markets," Papers 1911.12816, arXiv.org.
    17. Johnsen, Åshild A. & Kvaløy, Ola, 2021. "Conspiracy against the public - An experiment on collusion11“People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the publ," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    18. Dasgupta Utteeyo, 2011. "Are Entry Threats Always Credible?," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-41, December.
    19. Bruno S. Frey & Stephan Meier, "undated". "Pro-Social Behavior, Reciprocity or Both?," IEW - Working Papers 107, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    20. Hongxia Sun & Yao Wan & Huirong Lv, 2020. "System Dynamics Model for the Evolutionary Behaviour of Government Enterprises and Consumers in China’s New Energy Vehicle Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-21, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:apmaco:v:282:y:2016:i:c:p:117-127. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/applied-mathematics-and-computation .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.