Learning to Cooperate: Learning Networks and the Problem of Altruism

We explore how two populations learn to cooperate with each other in the absence of institutional support. Individuals play iterated prisoner's dilemmas with the other population, but learn about successful strategies from their own population. Our agent-based evolutionary models reconfirm that cooperation can emerge rapidly as long as payoffs provide a selective advantage for nice, retaliatory strategies like tit-for-tat, although attainable levels of cooperation are limited by the persistence of nonretaliatory altruists. Learning processes that adopt the current best response strategy do well only when initial conditions are very favorable to cooperation, while more adaptive learning processes can achieve high levels of cooperation under a wider range of initial conditions. When combined with adaptive learning, populations having larger, better connected learning relationships outperform populations with smaller, less connected ones. Clustered relationships can also enhance cooperation, particularly in these smaller, less connected populations.

[1]  Shui-Yan Tang Self-Organizing Federalism: Collaborative Mechanisms to Mitigate Institutional Collective Action Dilemmas , 2011 .

[2]  H. Ohtsuki,et al.  Evolutionary stability on graphs. , 2008, Journal of theoretical biology.

[3]  David Lazer,et al.  The Network Structure of Exploration and Exploitation , 2007 .

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

[5]  R. Putnam,et al.  E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty‐first Century The 2006 Johan Skytte Prize Lecture , 2007 .

[6]  G. Szabó,et al.  Evolutionary games on graphs , 2006, cond-mat/0607344.

[7]  S. N. Sivanandam,et al.  Introduction to genetic algorithms , 2007 .

[8]  M. Nowak Evolutionary Dynamics: Exploring the Equations of Life , 2006 .

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

[10]  Drew Fudenberg,et al.  Imitation Processes with Small Mutations , 2004, J. Econ. Theory.

[11]  John T. Scholz,et al.  Cooptation or Transformation? Local Policy Networks and Federal Regulatory Enforcement , 2006 .

[12]  D. Fudenberg,et al.  Evolutionary cycles of cooperation and defection. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[13]  Massimo Paolucci,et al.  Agent-Based Simulation , 2004 .

[14]  R. Burt Structural Holes and Good Ideas1 , 2004, American Journal of Sociology.

[15]  D. Fudenberg,et al.  Emergence of cooperation and evolutionary stability in finite populations , 2004, Nature.

[16]  Nicholas Mark Gotts,et al.  Agent-Based Simulation in the Study of Social Dilemmas , 2003, Artificial Intelligence Review.

[17]  Samuel Bowles,et al.  Microeconomics: Behavior, Institutions, and Evolution , 2003 .

[18]  Mark E. J. Newman,et al.  The Structure and Function of Complex Networks , 2003, SIAM Rev..

[19]  Mark Schneider,et al.  Building Consensual Institutions: Networks and the National Estuary Program , 2003 .

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

[21]  John T. Scholz,et al.  Watershed Partnerships and the Emergence of Collective Action Institutions , 2002 .

[22]  Goldberg,et al.  Genetic algorithms , 1993, Robust Control Systems with Genetic Algorithms.

[23]  Elinor Ostrom,et al.  Dilemma games: game parameters and matching protocols , 2001 .

[24]  Michael X Cohen,et al.  THE ROLE OF SOCIAL STRUCTURE IN THE MAINTENANCE OF COOPERATIVE REGIMES , 2001 .

[25]  Michael X Cohen,et al.  Harnessing Complexity: Organizational Implications of a Scientific Frontier , 2000 .

[26]  A. Shaked,et al.  Cooperation, Mimesis, and Local Interaction , 2000 .

[27]  M. Macy,et al.  The evolution of trust and cooperation between strangers: A computational model. , 1998 .

[28]  S. Bikhchandani,et al.  Learning from the behavior of others : conformity, fads, and informational cascades , 1998 .

[29]  S. Goyal,et al.  Learning from neighbours , 1998 .

[30]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks , 1998, Nature.

[31]  R. Axelrod Reviews book & software , 2022 .

[32]  D. Fudenberg,et al.  The Theory of Learning in Games , 1998 .

[33]  Andrew M. Colman,et al.  The complexity of cooperation: Agent-based models of competition and collaboration , 1998, Complex..

[34]  Jonathan Bendor,et al.  The Evolutionary Stability of Cooperation , 1997, American Political Science Review.

[35]  Robert Hoffmann,et al.  Complexity Cost and Two Types of Noise in the Repeated Prisoner's Dilemma , 1997, ICANNGA.

[36]  Dorothea Heiss-Czedik,et al.  An Introduction to Genetic Algorithms. , 1997, Artificial Life.

[37]  James D. Fearon,et al.  Explaining Interethnic Cooperation , 1996, American Political Science Review.

[38]  Dan Boneh,et al.  On genetic algorithms , 1995, COLT '95.

[39]  R. Axelrod,et al.  How to Cope with Noise in the Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma , 1995 .

[40]  Stanley Wasserman,et al.  Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications , 1994, Structural analysis in the social sciences.

[41]  P. Furlong Making democracy work: civic traditions in modern Italy , 1994 .

[42]  P. Sabatier,et al.  Policy Change And Learning: An Advocacy Coalition Approach , 1993 .

[43]  R. Rob,et al.  Learning, Mutation, and Long Run Equilibria in Games , 1993 .

[44]  J. March Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning , 1991, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.

[45]  D. Fudenberg,et al.  Evolution and Cooperation in Noisy Repeated Games , 1990 .

[46]  J. Coleman,et al.  Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital , 1988, American Journal of Sociology.

[47]  Mark S. Granovetter Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness , 1985, American Journal of Sociology.

[48]  W. Hamilton,et al.  The evolution of cooperation. , 1984, Science.

[49]  Mark S. Granovetter The Strength of Weak Ties , 1973, American Journal of Sociology.