IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/chsofr/v56y2013icp106-112.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effects of limited interactions between individuals on cooperation in spatial evolutionary prisoner’s dilemma game

Author

Listed:
  • Liu, Xu-Sheng
  • Guan, Jian-Yue
  • Wu, Zhi-Xi

Abstract

We study the spatial evolutionary prisoner’s dilemma game with limited interactions by introducing two kinds of individuals, say type-A and type-B with a fraction of p and (1−p), respectively, distributed randomly on a square lattice. Each kind of individuals can adopt two pure strategies: either to cooperate or to defect. During the evolution, the individuals can only interact with others belonging to the same kind, but they can learn from either kinds of individuals in the nearest neighborhood. Using Monte Carlo simulations, the average frequency of cooperators ρC is calculated as a function of p in the equilibrium state. It is shown that, compared with the case of p=0 (only one kind of individuals existing in the system), cooperation can be evidently promoted. In particular, the cooperator density can reach a maximum level at some moderate values of p in a wide range of payoff parameters. The results imply that certain limited interactions between individuals plays an important and nontrivial role in the evolution of cooperation.

Suggested Citation

  • Liu, Xu-Sheng & Guan, Jian-Yue & Wu, Zhi-Xi, 2013. "Effects of limited interactions between individuals on cooperation in spatial evolutionary prisoner’s dilemma game," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 106-112.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:chsofr:v:56:y:2013:i:c:p:106-112
    DOI: 10.1016/j.chaos.2013.07.015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096007791300146X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.chaos.2013.07.015?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. Lin, Ying-Ting & Yang, Han-Xin & Wu, Zhi-Xi & Wang, Bing-Hong, 2011. "Promotion of cooperation by aspiration-induced migration," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 390(1), pages 77-82.
    2. Martin A. Nowak & Karl Sigmund, 1998. "Evolution of indirect reciprocity by image scoring," Nature, Nature, vol. 393(6685), pages 573-577, June.
    3. M.A. Nowak & K. Sigmund, 1998. "Evolution of Indirect Reciprocity by Image Scoring/ The Dynamics of Indirect Reciprocity," Working Papers ir98040, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    4. Martin A. Nowak & Karl Sigmund, 2005. "Evolution of indirect reciprocity," Nature, Nature, vol. 437(7063), pages 1291-1298, October.
    5. Xiaojie Chen & Alana Schick & Michael Doebeli & Alistair Blachford & Long Wang, 2012. "Reputation-Based Conditional Interaction Supports Cooperation in Well-Mixed Prisoner’s Dilemmas," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(5), pages 1-7, May.
    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. Li, Ya & Lan, Xin & Deng, Xinyang & Sadiq, Rehan & Deng, Yong, 2014. "Comprehensive consideration of strategy updating promotes cooperation in the prisoner’s dilemma game," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 403(C), pages 284-292.
    2. Cai, Chao-Ran & Wu, Zhi-Xi & Guan, Jian-Yue, 2014. "Effect of vaccination strategies on the dynamic behavior of epidemic spreading and vaccine coverage," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 62, pages 36-43.
    3. Wang, Xu-Wen & Wang, Zhen & Nie, Sen & Jiang, Luo-Luo & Wang, Bing-Hong, 2015. "Impact of keeping silence on spatial reciprocity in spatial games," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 250(C), pages 848-853.

    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. Szabolcs Számadó & Ferenc Szalai & István Scheuring, 2016. "Deception Undermines the Stability of Cooperation in Games of Indirect Reciprocity," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(1), pages 1-17, January.
    2. Hong Ding & Lin Cao & Yizhi Ren & Kim-Kwang Raymond Choo & Benyun Shi, 2016. "Reputation-Based Investment Helps to Optimize Group Behaviors in Spatial Lattice Networks," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, September.
    3. Charness, Gary & Du, Ninghua & Yang, Chun-Lei, 2011. "Trust and trustworthiness reputations in an investment game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 361-375, June.
    4. Andrew W. Bausch, 2014. "Evolving intergroup cooperation," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 369-393, December.
    5. Ping Zhu & Guiyi Wei, 2014. "Stochastic Heterogeneous Interaction Promotes Cooperation in Spatial Prisoner's Dilemma Game," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(4), pages 1-10, April.
    6. Suzuki, Shinsuke & Akiyama, Eizo, 2008. "Evolutionary stability of first-order-information indirect reciprocity in sizable groups," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 73(3), pages 426-436.
    7. Liang, Pinghan & Meng, Juanjuan, 2016. "Favor transmission and social image concern: An experimental study," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 14-21.
    8. Lv, Shaojie & Wang, Xianjia, 2020. "The impact of heterogeneous investments on the evolution of cooperation in public goods game with exclusion," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 372(C).
    9. Mirko Duradoni & Mario Paolucci & Franco Bagnoli & Andrea Guazzini, 2018. "Fairness and Trust in Virtual Environments: The Effects of Reputation," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-15, June.
    10. Jason Delaney & Sarah Jacobson, 2016. "Payments or Persuasion: Common Pool Resource Management with Price and Non-price Measures," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 65(4), pages 747-772, December.
    11. Brent Simpson & Bradley Montgomery & David Melamed, 2023. "Reputations for treatment of outgroup members can prevent the emergence of political segregation in cooperative networks," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-14, December.
    12. Laura Schmid & Farbod Ekbatani & Christian Hilbe & Krishnendu Chatterjee, 2023. "Quantitative assessment can stabilize indirect reciprocity under imperfect information," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-14, December.
    13. Quan, Ji & Nie, Jiacheng & Chen, Wenman & Wang, Xianjia, 2022. "Keeping or reversing social norms promote cooperation by enhancing indirect reciprocity," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    14. Parvinen, Kalle, 2013. "Joint evolution of altruistic cooperation and dispersal in a metapopulation of small local populations," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 12-19.
    15. Quan, Ji & Tang, Caixia & Wang, Xianjia, 2021. "Reputation-based discount effect in imitation on the evolution of cooperation in spatial public goods games," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 563(C).
    16. Isamu Okada, 2020. "A Review of Theoretical Studies on Indirect Reciprocity," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-17, July.
    17. Rezaei, Golriz & Kirley, Michael, 2012. "Dynamic social networks facilitate cooperation in the N-player Prisoner’s Dilemma," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 391(23), pages 6199-6211.
    18. Giangiacomo Bravo & Lucia Tamburino, 2008. "The Evolution of Trust in Non-Simultaneous Exchange Situations," Rationality and Society, , vol. 20(1), pages 85-113, February.
    19. Danilo Liuzzi & Aymeric Vié, 2022. "Staring at the Abyss: a neurocognitive grounded agent-based model of collective-risk social dilemma under the threat of environmental disaster," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 17(2), pages 613-637, April.
    20. Wang, Xianjia & Ding, Rui & Zhao, Jinhua & Gu, Cuiling, 2022. "The rise and fall of cooperation in populations with multiple groups," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 413(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:chsofr:v:56:y:2013:i:c:p:106-112. 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: Thayer, Thomas R. (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/chaos-solitons-and-fractals .

    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.