IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/joevec/v24y2014i3p541-571.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Coevolution of finite automata with errors

Author

Listed:
  • Christos Ioannou

    ()

Abstract

We use a genetic algorithm to simulate the evolution of error-prone finite automata in the repeated Prisoner’s Dilemma game. In particular, the automata are subjected to implementation and perception errors. The computational experiments examine whether and how the distribution of outcomes and genotypes of the coevolved automata change with different levels of errors. We find that the complexity of the automata is decreasing in the probability of errors. Furthermore, the prevailing structures tend to exhibit low reciprocal cooperation and low tolerance to defections as the probability of errors increases. In addition, by varying the error level, the study identifies a threshold. Below the threshold, the prevailing structures are closed-loop (history-dependent) and diverse, which impedes any inferential projections on the superiority of a particular automaton. However, at and above the threshold, the prevailing structures converge to the open-loop (history-independent) automaton Always-Defect (ALLD). Finally, we find that perception errors are more detrimental than implementation errors to the fitness of the automata. These resultsshow that the evolution of cooperative automata is considerably weaker than expected. Copyright Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Christos Ioannou, 2014. "Coevolution of finite automata with errors," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 541-571, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:joevec:v:24:y:2014:i:3:p:541-571
    DOI: 10.1007/s00191-013-0325-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s00191-013-0325-5
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ben-porath, Elchanan, 1990. "The complexity of computing a best response automaton in repeated games with mixed strategies," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-12, March.
    2. Neyman, Abraham, 1985. "Bounded complexity justifies cooperation in the finitely repeated prisoners' dilemma," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 227-229.
    3. Dawes, Robyn M & Thaler, Richard H, 1988. "Anomalies: Cooperation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 2(3), pages 187-197, Summer.
    4. Banks, Jeffrey S. & Sundaram, Rangarajan K., 1990. "Repeated games, finite automata, and complexity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 2(2), pages 97-117, June.
    5. Fudenberg, Drew & Maskin, Eric, 1986. "The Folk Theorem in Repeated Games with Discounting or with Incomplete Information," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(3), pages 533-554, May.
    6. Binmore, Kenneth G. & Samuelson, Larry, 1992. "Evolutionary stability in repeated games played by finite automata," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 278-305, August.
    7. Heiner, Ronald A, 1983. "The Origin of Predictable Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(4), pages 560-595, September.
    8. Kandori, Michihiro & Mailath, George J & Rob, Rafael, 1993. "Learning, Mutation, and Long Run Equilibria in Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(1), pages 29-56, January.
    9. Fernando Vega-Redondo, 1997. "The Evolution of Walrasian Behavior," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(2), pages 375-384, March.
    10. Bergin, James & Lipman, Barton L, 1996. "Evolution with State-Dependent Mutations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(4), pages 943-956, July.
    11. Ben-Shoham, Assaf & Serrano, Roberto & Volij, Oscar, 2004. "The evolution of exchange," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 114(2), pages 310-328, February.
    12. Ben-Porath Elchanan, 1993. "Repeated Games with Finite Automata," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 17-32, February.
    13. Rubinstein, Ariel, 1986. "Finite automata play the repeated prisoner's dilemma," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 83-96, June.
    14. Reinhard Selten & Michael Mitzkewitz & Gerald R. Uhlich, 1997. "Duopoly Strategies Programmed by Experienced Players," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(3), pages 517-556, May.
    15. Marks, R E, 1992. "Breeding Hybrid Strategies: Optimal Behaviour for Oligopolists," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 17-38, March.
    16. Miller, John H., 1996. "The coevolution of automata in the repeated Prisoner's Dilemma," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 87-112, January.
    17. Jonathan Bendor & Roderick M. Kramer & Suzanne Stout, 1991. "When in Doubt..," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 35(4), pages 691-719, December.
    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. Alejandro Lee-Penagos, 2016. "Learning to Coordinate: Co-Evolution and Correlated Equilibrium," Discussion Papers 2016-11, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    2. repec:eee:gamebe:v:107:y:2018:i:c:p:203-219 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. repec:spr:joevec:v:27:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s00191-016-0489-x is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Automata; Repeated games; Prisoner’s dilemma; Bounded rationality; Algorithms; C72; C80; C90;

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • C80 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - General
    • C90 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - General

    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:spr:joevec:v:24:y:2014:i:3:p:541-571. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.