skip to main content
article

A strategy with novel evolutionary features for the iterated prisoner's dilemma

Published:01 June 2009Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

In recent iterated prisoner's dilemma tournaments, the most successful strategies were those that had identification mechanisms. By playing a predetermined sequence of moves and learning from their opponents' responses, these strategies managed to identify their opponents. We believe that these identification mechanisms may be very useful in evolutionary games. In this paper one such strategy, which we call collective strategy, is analyzed. Collective strategies apply a simple but efficient identification mechanism (that just distinguishes themselves from other strategies), and this mechanism allows them to only cooperate with their group members and defect against any others. In this way, collective strategies are able to maintain a stable population in evolutionary iterated prisoner's dilemma. By means of an invasion barrier, this strategy is compared with other strategies in evolutionary dynamics in order to demonstrate its evolutionary features. We also find that this collective behavior assists the evolution of cooperation in specific evolutionary environments.

References

  1. Ashlock, W., and Ashlock, D. (2006). Changes in prisoner's dilemma strategies over evolutionary time with different population sizes. Proceedings of the 2006 Congress on Evolutionary Computation, pp. 297-304.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Ashlock, D., Smucker, M., Stanley, E., and Tesfatsion, L. (1996). Preferential partner selection in an evolutionary study of prisoner's dilemma. BioSystems, 37:99-125.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Axelrod, R. (1980a). Effective choice in the prisoner's dilemma. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 24:3-25.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Axelrod, R. (1980b). More effective choice in the prisoner's dilemma. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 24:379-403.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Axelrod, R. (1984). The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic Books.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Boyd, R., and Lorberbaum, J. (1987). No pure strategy is evolutionarily stable in the repeated prisoner's dilemma game. Nature, 327:58-59.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Carmel, D., and Markovitch, S. (1998). How to explore your opponent's strategy (almost) optimally. Proceedings of the International Conference on Multi Agent Systems, pp. 64-71. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Chong, S., Humble, J., Kendall, G., Li, J., and Yao, X. (2007). Iterated prisoner's dilemma and evolutionary game theory. In G. Kendall, X. Yao, and S. Y. Chong, (Eds.), The Iterated Prisoners Dilemma: 20 Years On, chapter 2. Singapore: World Scientific.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Cooper, R., Jong, D., Forsythe, R., and Ross, T. (1996). Cooperation without reputation: Experimental evidence from prisoner's dilemma games. Games and Economic Behavior, 12(2):187-218.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Darwen, P., and Yao, X. (2002). Coevolution in iterated prisoner's dilemma with intermediate levels of cooperation: Application to missile defence. International Journal of Computational Intelligence and Applications, 2(1):83-107.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Farrell, J. (1995). Talk is cheap. The American Economic Review, 85(2):186-190.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Fogel, D. (1993). Evolving behaviors in the iterated prisoner's dilemma. Evolutionary Computation, 1(1):77-97. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Fogel, D. (1995). On the relationship between the duration of an encounter and the evolution of cooperation in the iterated prisoner's dilemma. Evolutionary Computation, 3(3):349-363. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Harsanyi, J. (1967). Games with incomplete information played by "Bayesian" players. Management Science, 14(3):159-182.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Hoffmann, R. (2000). Twenty years on: The evolution of cooperation revisited. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 3(2). Accessed 4/08/09 at ¿http://www.soc.surrey.ac.uk/ JASSS/3/2/forum/1.html'.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Ishibuchi, H., and Namikawa, N. (2005). Evolution of iterated prisoner's dilemma game strategies in structured demes under random pairing in game playing. IEEE Transaction on Evolutionary Computation, 9(6):552-561. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Kahn, L., and Murnighan, J. (1993). Conjecture, uncertainty, and cooperation in prisoners' dilemma games: Some experimental evidence. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organisms, 22:91-117.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Kendall, G., Yao, X., and Chong, S.Y. (Eds.). (2007). The Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma: 20 Years On. Singapore: World Scientific. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Kraines, D., and Kraines, V. (2000). Natural selection of memory--One strategy for the iterated prisoner's dilemma. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 203:335-355.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Kreps, D., Milgrom, P., Roberts, J., and Wilson, R. (1982). Rational cooperation in the finitely repeated prisoner's dilemma. Journal of Economic Theory, 27:245-252.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Li, J. (2007). How to design a strategy to win an IPD tournament. In G. Kendall, X. Yao, and S. Y. Chong, (Eds.), The Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma: 20 Years On, chapter 4. Singapore: World Scientific.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Lindgren, K., and Nordhal, M. (1995). Cooperation and community structure in artificial ecosystems. In C. G. Langton, (Ed.), Artificial Life, An Overview (pp. 15-37). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Lorberbaum, J. (1994). No strategy is evolutionarily stable in the repeated prisoner's dilemma. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 168:117-130.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Lorberbaum, J., Bohning, D., Shastri, A., and Sine, L. (2002). Are there really no evolutionarily stable strategies in the iterated prisoner's dilemma? Journal of Theoretical Biology, 214:155-169.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Maynard Smith, J. (1982). Evolution and the Theory of Games. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Nachbar, J., and Zame, W. (1996). Non-computable strategies and discounted repeated games. Economic Theory, 8:103-122.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Nowak, M., and May, R. (1993). The spatial dilemmas of evolution. International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos, 3:35-78.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Nowak, M., and Sigmund, K. (1992). Tit for tat in heterogeneous populations. Nature, 355:250-252.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Robson, A. (1990). Efficiency in evolutionary games: Darwin, Nash, and the secret handshake. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 144:379-396.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Rogers, A., Dash, R. K., Ramchurn, S. D., Vytelingum, P., and Jennings, N. R. (2007). Error-correcting codes for team coordination within a noisy iterated prisoner's dilemma tournament. In G. Kendall, X. Yao, and S. Y. Chong, (Eds.), The Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma: 20 Years On, chapter 9. Singapore: World Scientific.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Simon, H. (1990). A mechanism for social selection and successful altruism. Science, 250(4988):1665-1668.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Stanley, E., Ashlock, D., and Tesfatsion, L. (1994). Iterated prisoner's dilemma with choice and refusal of partners. In C. Langton, (Ed.), Artificial Life III, pp. 131-175. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Thibert-Plante, X., and Charbonneau, P. (2007). Crossover and evolutionary stability in the prisoner's dilemma. Evolutionary Computation, 15(3):321-344. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Thomas, B. (1985). On evolutionarily stable sets. Journal of Mathematical Biology, 22:105-115.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Wiseman, T., and Yilankaya, O. (2001). Cooperation, secret handshakes, and imitation in the prisoner's dilemma. Games and Economic Behavior, 37:216-242.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. A strategy with novel evolutionary features for the iterated prisoner's dilemma

              Recommendations

              Comments

              Login options

              Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

              Sign in

              Full Access

              PDF Format

              View or Download as a PDF file.

              PDF

              eReader

              View online with eReader.

              eReader