Partially and Wholly Overlapping Networks: The Evolutionary Dynamics of Social Dilemmas on Social Networks

It has been widely accepted that the evolution of cooperation in social dilemmas is likely to have simultaneous effects on different levels of networks—that is, overlapping networks. In this scenario, we apply the evolutionary dynamics of social dilemmas (the Prisoner’s dilemma and the Stag Hunt) to two levels of networks, playing network interaction game (scale-free networks) and imitating the strategies of dynamic learning networks by concentrating on the levels of dynamically overlapping levels in both networks. It was found that the higher level of dynamically overlap can promote the emergence of cooperation in the Prisoner’s Dilemma and the Stag Hunt. When networks overlap dynamically, it leads to cooperation in the Stag Hunt; when the networks do not overlap, cooperation will not occur in the Prisoner’s dilemma. Specifically, if two kinds of networks in the real world truly dynamically overlap at least partially, in some sense, the self-organizing phenomenon arising out of the overlapping effect could solve “coordination failure” in the market without external enforcement mechanisms, which contradicts conventional intervention polices.

[1]  K. Aihara,et al.  Spatial prisoner's dilemma optimally played in small-world networks , 2003 .

[2]  R. Cressman Evolutionary Dynamics and Extensive Form Games , 2003 .

[3]  M. Perc,et al.  Towards effective payoffs in the prisoner’s dilemma game on scale-free networks , 2007, 0711.4028.

[4]  Martin A. Nowak,et al.  Evolutionary dynamics on graphs , 2005, Nature.

[5]  Karl Sigmund,et al.  Games Of Life , 1993 .

[6]  Matthew O. Jackson,et al.  On the formation of interaction networks in social coordination games , 2002, Games Econ. Behav..

[7]  S. Redner,et al.  Voter models on heterogeneous networks. , 2007, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[8]  Jie Wu,et al.  Small Worlds: The Dynamics of Networks between Order and Randomness , 2003 .

[9]  Takaya Arita,et al.  Evolution of cooperation on different pairs of interaction and replacement networks with various intensity of selection , 2009, 2009 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.

[10]  Rick L. Riolo,et al.  Beyond Geography: Cooperation with Persistent Links in the Absence of Clustered Neighborhoods , 2002 .

[11]  Sanjeev Goyal,et al.  A Noncooperative Model of Network Formation , 2000 .

[12]  Michael Doebeli,et al.  Spatial structure often inhibits the evolution of cooperation in the snowdrift game , 2004, Nature.

[13]  F. C. Santos,et al.  Evolutionary dynamics of social dilemmas in structured heterogeneous populations. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[14]  Albert,et al.  Emergence of scaling in random networks , 1999, Science.

[15]  Zhi-Xi Wu,et al.  Cooperation enhanced by the difference between interaction and learning neighborhoods for evolutionary spatial prisoner's dilemma games. , 2007, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[16]  F. C. Santos,et al.  Social diversity promotes the emergence of cooperation in public goods games , 2008, Nature.

[17]  Martin A Nowak,et al.  Evolutionary graph theory: breaking the symmetry between interaction and replacement. , 2007, Journal of theoretical biology.

[18]  P. Maître PLAYING FAIR GAME THEORY AND THE SOCIAL CONTRACT , 1994 .

[19]  M. Nowak,et al.  Evolution of indirect reciprocity , 2005, Nature.

[20]  R. Mulet,et al.  Evolutionary prisoner’s dilemma in random graphs , 2003 .

[21]  P. Kollock SOCIAL DILEMMAS: The Anatomy of Cooperation , 1998 .

[22]  Arne Traulsen,et al.  Coevolution of strategy and structure in complex networks with dynamical linking. , 2006, Physical review letters.

[23]  Ángel Sánchez,et al.  Effect of spatial structure on the evolution of cooperation , 2008, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[24]  J. Kleinberg Algorithmic Game Theory: Cascading Behavior in Networks: Algorithmic and Economic Issues , 2007 .

[25]  S. Bornholdt,et al.  Coevolutionary games on networks. , 2002, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[26]  Jörgen W. Weibull,et al.  Evolutionary Game Theory , 1996 .

[27]  H. Ohtsuki,et al.  A simple rule for the evolution of cooperation on graphs and social networks , 2006, Nature.

[28]  R. Hinde,et al.  The Possibility of Cooperation@@@Cooperation: The Basis of Sociability.@@@Cooperation and Prosocial Behavior.@@@Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. , 1990 .

[29]  Alessandra Cassar,et al.  Coordination and Cooperation in Local, Random and Small World Networks: Experimental Evidence , 2002, Games Econ. Behav..

[30]  Peter D. Taylor,et al.  Evolution of cooperation in a finite homogeneous graph , 2007, Nature.

[31]  M. Kuperman,et al.  Social games in a social network. , 2000, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[32]  Attila Szolnoki,et al.  Evolutionary prisoner's dilemma game on Newman-Watts networks. , 2007, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.