IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1008217.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Friendly-rivalry solution to the iterated n-person public-goods game

Author

Listed:
  • Yohsuke Murase
  • Seung Ki Baek

Abstract

Repeated interaction promotes cooperation among rational individuals under the shadow of future, but it is hard to maintain cooperation when a large number of error-prone individuals are involved. One way to construct a cooperative Nash equilibrium is to find a ‘friendly-rivalry’ strategy, which aims at full cooperation but never allows the co-players to be better off. Recently it has been shown that for the iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma in the presence of error, a friendly rival can be designed with the following five rules: Cooperate if everyone did, accept punishment for your own mistake, punish defection, recover cooperation if you find a chance, and defect in all the other circumstances. In this work, we construct such a friendly-rivalry strategy for the iterated n-person public-goods game by generalizing those five rules. The resulting strategy makes a decision with referring to the previous m = 2n − 1 rounds. A friendly-rivalry strategy for n = 2 inherently has evolutionary robustness in the sense that no mutant strategy has higher fixation probability in this population than that of a neutral mutant. Our evolutionary simulation indeed shows excellent performance of the proposed strategy in a broad range of environmental conditions when n = 2 and 3.Author summary: How to maintain cooperation among a number of self-interested individuals is a difficult problem, especially if they can sometimes commit error. In this work, we propose a strategy for the iterated n-person public-goods game based on the following five rules: Cooperate if everyone did, accept punishment for your own mistake, punish others’ defection, recover cooperation if you find a chance, and defect in all the other circumstances. These rules are not far from actual human behavior, and the resulting strategy guarantees three advantages: First, if everyone uses it, full cooperation is recovered even if error occurs with small probability. Second, the player of this strategy always never obtains a lower long-term payoff than any of the co-players. Third, if the co-players are unconditional cooperators, it obtains a strictly higher long-term payoff than theirs. Therefore, if everyone uses this strategy, no one has a reason to change it. Furthermore, our simulation shows that this strategy will become highly abundant over long time scales due to its robustness against the invasion of other strategies. In this sense, the repeated social dilemma is solved for an arbitrary number of players.

Suggested Citation

  • Yohsuke Murase & Seung Ki Baek, 2021. "Friendly-rivalry solution to the iterated n-person public-goods game," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(1), pages 1-17, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1008217
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008217
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008217
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008217&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008217?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Imhof, Lorens & Nowak, Martin & Fudenberg, Drew, 2007. "Tit-for-Tat or Win-Stay, Lose-Shift?," Scholarly Articles 3200671, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    2. Herbert Gintis, 2006. "Behavioral ethics meets natural justice," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 5(1), pages 5-32, February.
    3. Ethan Akin, 2015. "What You Gotta Know to Play Good in the Iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma," Games, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-16, June.
    4. Christoph Adami & Arend Hintze, 2013. "Evolutionary instability of zero-determinant strategies demonstrates that winning is not everything," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 4(1), pages 1-8, October.
    5. Christian Hilbe & Krishnendu Chatterjee & Martin A. Nowak, 2018. "Partners and rivals in direct reciprocity," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 2(7), pages 469-477, July.
    6. Hilbe, Christian & Traulsen, Arne & Sigmund, Karl, 2015. "Partners or rivals? Strategies for the iterated prisoner's dilemma," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 41-52.
    7. Christian Hilbe & Martin A Nowak & Arne Traulsen, 2013. "Adaptive Dynamics of Extortion and Compliance," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(11), pages 1-9, November.
    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. Aloysius Suratin & Suyud Warno Utomo & Dwi Nowo Martono & Kosuke Mizuno, 2023. "Indonesia’s Renewable Natural Resource Management in the Low-Carbon Transition: A Conundrum in Changing Trajectories," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-17, July.

    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. Masahiko Ueda & Toshiyuki Tanaka, 2020. "Linear algebraic structure of zero-determinant strategies in repeated games," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-13, April.
    2. Christopher Lee & Marc Harper & Dashiell Fryer, 2015. "The Art of War: Beyond Memory-one Strategies in Population Games," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-16, March.
    3. McAvoy, Alex & Hauert, Christoph, 2017. "Autocratic strategies for alternating games," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 13-22.
    4. Peter S. Park & Martin A. Nowak & Christian Hilbe, 2022. "Cooperation in alternating interactions with memory constraints," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-11, December.
    5. Marc Harper & Vincent Knight & Martin Jones & Georgios Koutsovoulos & Nikoleta E Glynatsi & Owen Campbell, 2017. "Reinforcement learning produces dominant strategies for the Iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-33, December.
    6. Amnon Rapoport & Darryl A Seale & Andrew M Colman, 2015. "Is Tit-for-Tat the Answer? On the Conclusions Drawn from Axelrod's Tournaments," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-11, July.
    7. Maria Kleshnina & Christian Hilbe & Štěpán Šimsa & Krishnendu Chatterjee & Martin A. Nowak, 2023. "The effect of environmental information on evolution of cooperation in stochastic games," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-11, December.
    8. Ding, Zhen-Wei & Zheng, Guo-Zhong & Cai, Chao-Ran & Cai, Wei-Ran & Chen, Li & Zhang, Ji-Qiang & Wang, Xu-Ming, 2023. "Emergence of cooperation in two-agent repeated games with reinforcement learning," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 175(P1).
    9. Molnar, Grant & Hammond, Caroline & Fu, Feng, 2023. "Reactive means in the iterated Prisoner’s dilemma," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 458(C).
    10. Yali Dong & Cong Li & Yi Tao & Boyu Zhang, 2015. "Evolution of Conformity in Social Dilemmas," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-12, September.
    11. Shun Kurokawa & Joe Yuichiro Wakano & Yasuo Ihara, 2018. "Evolution of Groupwise Cooperation: Generosity, Paradoxical Behavior, and Non-Linear Payoff Functions," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-24, December.
    12. 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).
    13. Vincent Knight & Marc Harper & Nikoleta E Glynatsi & Owen Campbell, 2018. "Evolution reinforces cooperation with the emergence of self-recognition mechanisms: An empirical study of strategies in the Moran process for the iterated prisoner’s dilemma," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-33, October.
    14. Usui, Yuki & Ueda, Masahiko, 2021. "Symmetric equilibrium of multi-agent reinforcement learning in repeated prisoner’s dilemma," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 409(C).
    15. 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.
    16. Fiaschi, Lorenzo & Cococcioni, Marco, 2021. "Non-Archimedean game theory: A numerical approach," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 409(C).
    17. Evans, Alecia & Sesmero, Juan, 2022. "Cooperation in Social Dilemmas with Correlated Noisy Payoffs: Theory and Experimental Evidence," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 322804, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Liu, Fanglin & Wu, Bin, 2022. "Environmental quality and population welfare in Markovian eco-evolutionary dynamics," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 431(C).
    19. Huang, Keke & Liu, Yishun & Zhang, Yichi & Yang, Chunhua & Wang, Zhen, 2018. "Understanding cooperative behavior of agents with heterogeneous perceptions in dynamic networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 509(C), pages 234-240.
    20. Creutzig, Felix, 2020. "Limits to Liberalism: Considerations for the Anthropocene," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(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:plo:pcbi00:1008217. 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: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .

    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.