IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2112.02271.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Cooperation, Retaliation and Forgiveness in Revision Games

Author

Listed:
  • Dong Hao
  • Qi Shi
  • Jinyan Su
  • Bo An

Abstract

Revision game is a very new model formulating the real-time situation where players dynamically prepare and revise their actions in advance before a deadline when payoffs are realized. It is at the cutting edge of dynamic game theory and can be applied in many real-world scenarios, such as eBay auction, stock market, election, online games, crowdsourcing, etc. In this work, we novelly identify a class of strategies for revision games which are called Limited Retaliation strategies. An limited retaliation strategy stipulates that, (1) players first follow a recommended cooperative plan; (2) if anyone deviates from the plan, the limited retaliation player retaliates by using the defection action for a limited duration; (3) after the retaliation, the limited retaliation player returns to the cooperative plan. A limited retaliation strategy has three key features. It is cooperative, sustaining a high level of social welfare. It is vengeful, deterring the opponent from betrayal by threatening with a future retaliation. It is yet forgiving, since it resumes cooperation after a proper retaliation. The cooperativeness and vengefulness make it constitute cooperative subgame perfect equilibrium, while the forgiveness makes it tolerate occasional mistakes. limited retaliation strategies show significant advantages over Grim Trigger, which is currently the only known strategy for revision games. Besides its contribution as a new robust and welfare-optimizing equilibrium strategy, our results about limited retaliation strategy can also be used to explain how easy cooperation can happen, and why forgiveness emerges in real-world multi-agent interactions. In addition, limited retaliation strategies are simple to derive and computationally efficient, making it easy for algorithm design and implementation in many multi-agent systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Dong Hao & Qi Shi & Jinyan Su & Bo An, 2021. "Cooperation, Retaliation and Forgiveness in Revision Games," Papers 2112.02271, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2022.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2112.02271
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2112.02271
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gensbittel, Fabien & Lovo, Stefano & Renault, Jérôme & Tomala, Tristan, 2018. "Zero-sum revision games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 504-522.
    2. Attila Ambrus & Shih En Lu, 2015. "A Continuous-Time Model of Multilateral Bargaining," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(1), pages 208-249, February.
    3. Fudenberg, Drew & Maskin, Eric, 1990. "Evolution and Cooperation in Noisy Repeated Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(2), pages 274-279, May.
    4. Sofia Moroni, 2015. "Existence of trembling hand equilibrium in revision games with imperfect information," Working Paper 5874, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh.
    5. Lovo , Stefano & Tomala , Tristan, 2015. "Markov Perfect Equilibria in Stochastic Revision Games," HEC Research Papers Series 1093, HEC Paris.
    6. , & , & , & ,, 2014. "Asynchronicity and coordination in common and opposing interest games," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(2), May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Sofia Moroni, 2020. "Existence of Trembling hand perfect and sequential equilibrium in Stochastic Games," Working Paper 6837, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh.
    2. Zhuohan Wang & Dong Hao, 2022. "Characterizing Agent Behavior in Revision Games with Uncertain Deadline," Games, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-13, November.
    3. Roy, Nilanjan, 2023. "Fostering collusion through action revision in duopolies," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    4. Sofia Moroni, 2019. "Existence of trembling hand perfect and sequential equilibrium in games with stochastic timing of moves," Working Paper 6757, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh.
    5. Yuichiro Kamada & Michihiro Kandori, 2020. "Revision Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(4), pages 1599-1630, July.
    6. Yevgeny Tsodikovich, 2021. "The worst-case payoff in games with stochastic revision opportunities," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 300(1), pages 205-224, May.
    7. Sofia Moroni, 2018. "Games with Private Timing," Working Paper 6400, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh.
    8. Sofia Moroni, 2016. "Sniping in Proxy Auctions with Deadlines," Working Paper 5875, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh.
    9. Ryota Iijima & Akitada Kasahara, 2016. "Gradual Adjustment and Equilibrium Uniqueness under Noisy Monitoring," ISER Discussion Paper 0965, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    10. 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.
    11. Bhaskar V., 1996. "On the neutral stability of mixed strategies in asymmetric contests," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 56-57, February.
    12. Bhaskar, V., 1993. "Neutral Stability in Assymetric Evolutionary Games," Papers 9358, Tilburg - Center for Economic Research.
    13. John T. Scholz & Cheng‐Lung Wang, 2009. "Learning to Cooperate: Learning Networks and the Problem of Altruism," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(3), pages 572-587, July.
    14. Shota Fujishima, 2015. "The emergence of cooperation through leadership," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 44(1), pages 17-36, February.
    15. Ho, Teck-Hua, 1996. "Finite automata play repeated prisoner's dilemma with information processing costs," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 20(1-3), pages 173-207.
    16. Davidson Cheng, 2022. "Asymmetric Equilibria in Symmetric Multiplayer Prisoners Dilemma Supergames," Papers 2205.13772, arXiv.org.
    17. Cason, Timothy N. & Mui, Vai-Lam, 2019. "Individual versus group choices of repeated game strategies: A strategy method approach," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 128-145.
    18. Ledyard, John O., "undated". "Public Goods: A Survey of Experimental Research," Working Papers 861, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
    19. Sobel, Joel, 2000. "Economists' Models of Learning," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 241-261, October.
    20. Gensbittel, Fabien & Lovo, Stefano & Renault, Jérôme & Tomala, Tristan, 2018. "Zero-sum revision games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 504-522.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2112.02271. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.