Scaling the phase-planes of social dilemma strengths shows game-class changes in the five rules governing the evolution of cooperation

192Citations
Citations of this article
46Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Game theory has been extensively applied to help explain how cooperative behaviour is promoted in human and animal societies. How do humans and animals establish reciprocity when confronting a social dilemma? In 2006, Nowak theoretically proved that numerous mechanisms and models for evolving cooperative behaviour reported over the last few decades can be distilled into five reciprocity mechanisms (rules). Additionally, universal scaling parameters were proposed to measure two different types of dilemmas, namely, the gamble-intending dilemma (GID) and risk-averting dilemma (RAD). In this work, by drawing a RAD-GID phase-plane diagram for pair-wise games, we prove that these five rules are indeed quite different for the resolution (relaxation) of the two dilemmas. These diagrams also demonstrate whether and when game-class change (resolution of a dilemma) occurs, thus implying how defectors can be eliminated.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ito, H., & Tanimoto, J. (2018). Scaling the phase-planes of social dilemma strengths shows game-class changes in the five rules governing the evolution of cooperation. Royal Society Open Science, 5(10). https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.181085

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free