IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2511.19828.html

Expectation-enforcing strategies for repeated games

Author

Listed:
  • Nikos Dimou
  • Alex McAvoy

Abstract

Originating in evolutionary game theory, the class of "zero-determinant" strategies enables a player to unilaterally enforce linear payoff relationships in simple repeated games. An upshot of this kind of payoff constraint is that it can shape the incentives for the opponent in a predetermined way. An example is when a player ensures that the agents get equal payoffs. While extensively studied in infinite-horizon games, extensions to discounted games, nonlinear payoff relationships, richer strategic environments, and behaviors with long memory remain incompletely understood. In this paper, we provide necessary and sufficient conditions for a player to enforce arbitrary payoff relationships (linear or nonlinear), in expectation, in discounted games. These conditions characterize precisely which payoff relationships are enforceable using strategies of arbitrary complexity. Our main result establishes that any such enforceable relationship can actually be implemented using a simple two-point reactive learning strategy, which conditions on the opponent's most recent action and the player's own previous mixed action, using information from only one round into the past. For additive payoff constraints, we show that enforcement is possible using even simpler (reactive) strategies that depend solely on the opponent's last move. In other words, this tractable class is universal within expectation-enforcing strategies. As examples, we apply these results to characterize extortionate, generous, equalizer, and fair strategies in the iterated prisoner's dilemma, asymmetric donation game, nonlinear donation game, and the hawk-dove game, identifying precisely when each class of strategy is enforceable and with what minimum discount factor.

Suggested Citation

  • Nikos Dimou & Alex McAvoy, 2025. "Expectation-enforcing strategies for repeated games," Papers 2511.19828, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2511.19828
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2511.19828
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Emilio Calvano & Giacomo Calzolari & Vincenzo Denicolò & Sergio Pastorello, 2020. "Artificial Intelligence, Algorithmic Pricing, and Collusion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(10), pages 3267-3297, October.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Zhijian Wang & Yanran Zhou & Jaimie W. Lien & Jie Zheng & Bin Xu, 2016. "Extortion Can Outperform Generosity in the Iterated Prisoners' Dilemma," Levine's Bibliography 786969000000001297, UCLA Department of Economics.
    5. Christoph Hauert & Michael Doebeli, 2004. "Spatial structure often inhibits the evolution of cooperation in the snowdrift game," Nature, Nature, vol. 428(6983), pages 643-646, April.
    6. repec:cla:levarc:786969000000001297 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Bernheim, B. Douglas & Peleg, Bezalel & Whinston, Michael D., 1987. "Coalition-Proof Nash Equilibria I. Concepts," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 1-12, June.
    8. McAvoy, Alex & Hauert, Christoph, 2017. "Autocratic strategies for alternating games," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 13-22.
    9. Zhijian Wang & Yanran Zhou & Jaimie W. Lien & Jie Zheng & Bin Xu, 2016. "Extortion can outperform generosity in the iterated prisoner’s dilemma," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 7(1), pages 1-7, September.
    10. Manfred Milinski & Christian Hilbe & Dirk Semmann & Ralf Sommerfeld & Jochem Marotzke, 2016. "Humans choose representatives who enforce cooperation in social dilemmas through extortion," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 7(1), pages 1-9, April.
    11. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999. "A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(3), pages 817-868.
    12. Drew Fudenberg & Eric Maskin, 2008. "The Folk Theorem In Repeated Games With Discounting Or With Incomplete Information," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Drew Fudenberg & David K Levine (ed.), A Long-Run Collaboration On Long-Run Games, chapter 11, pages 209-230, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    13. Barlo, Mehmet & Carmona, Guilherme & Sabourian, Hamid, 2009. "Repeated games with one-memory," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(1), pages 312-336, January.
    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. Kang, Kai & Tian, Jinyan & Zhang, Boyu, 2024. "Cooperation and control in asymmetric repeated games," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 470(C).
    2. Ueda, Masahiko, 2025. "On the implementation of zero-determinant strategies in repeated games," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 489(C).
    3. Zhou, Zhizhuo & Rong, Zhihai & Yang, Wen & Wu, Zhi-Xi, 2024. "Coevolution of extortion strategies with mixed imitation and aspiration learning dynamics in spatial Prisoner’s Dilemma game," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    4. Zhou, Biheng & Rong, Zhihai & Yu, Xiang, 2025. "Equalizing payoffs of a structured population in repeated Prisoner’s Dilemma game," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    5. 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.
    6. Ding, Shasha & Sun, Hao & Sun, Panfei & Han, Weibin, 2022. "Dynamic outcome of coopetition duopoly with implicit collusion," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    7. Christian Hilbe & Kristin Hagel & Manfred Milinski, 2016. "Asymmetric Power Boosts Extortion in an Economic Experiment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-14, October.
    8. Jie, Yingmo & Liu, Charles Zhechao & Choo, Kim-Kwang Raymond & Guo, Cheng, 2024. "An incentive compatible ZD strategy-based data sharing model for federated learning: A perspective of iterated prisoner's dilemma," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 315(2), pages 764-776.
    9. Masahiko Ueda, 2022. "Controlling Conditional Expectations by Zero-Determinant Strategies," SN Operations Research Forum, Springer, vol. 3(3), pages 1-22, September.
    10. Etro, Federico, 2017. "Research in economics and game theory. A 70th anniversary," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 1-7.
    11. 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).
    12. Taha, Mohammad A. & Ghoneim, Ayman, 2020. "Zero-determinant strategies in repeated asymmetric games," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 369(C).
    13. 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.
    14. Anne Corcos & Yorgos Rizopoulos, 2011. "Is prosocial behavior egocentric? The “invisible hand” of emotions," Post-Print halshs-01968213, HAL.
    15. Ghidoni, Riccardo & Suetens, Sigrid, 2019. "Empirical Evidence on Repeated Sequential Games," Other publications TiSEM ff3a441f-e196-4e45-ba59-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    16. Fabian Winter, 2013. "Fairness norms can explain the emergence of specific cooperation norms in the Battle of the Prisoners Dilemma," Jena Economics Research Papers 2013-016, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    17. He, Haoran & Wu, Keyu, 2016. "Choice set, relative income, and inequity aversion: An experimental investigation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 177-193.
    18. van der Pol, Thomas & Weikard, Hans-Peter & van Ierland, Ekko, 2012. "Can altruism stabilise international climate agreements?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 112-120.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.

    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:2511.19828. 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.