Anisotropic strategies and the evolution of cooperation in social dilemmas on networks

Abstract Anisotropic strategies are introduced and studied numerically and analytically in the context of prisoner’s dilemma (PD) played in a system of connected agents for their effects on the evolution of cooperation. For an agent competing with k neighbors, an anisotropic strategy has k entries representing the different actions against each of the opponents. The commonly used cooperative and non-cooperative strategies against all opponents are isotropic and special cases of anisotropic strategies. For evolutionary PD based on a death–birth process in dynamically formed competing groups, selection results in a totally non-cooperative state but the dynamics is altered by the anisotropic strategies. For agents connected by static networks having a uniform degree, the cooperative level exhibits plateaux as the temptation payoff increases. The plateaux represent the dominance of different classes of anisotropic strategies with decreasing cooperative entries. Dynamical equations with results in good agreement with simulation results on the evolution of strategies and the long time behavior are constructed. For static networks with a spread in degrees, the plateaux disappear except for the one corresponding to a totally cooperative population. For all cases, anisotropic strategies are found to maintain a cooperative level no less than that in a corresponding system in which only isotropic strategies are in play for high temptation payoffs. Anisotropic strategies suggest an alternative mechanism for enhancing cooperation in PD and other games that is worthy of further investigations.

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

[2]  P M Hui,et al.  Phase transitions in a coevolving snowdrift game with costly rewiring. , 2014, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

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

[4]  Elizabeth Pennisi,et al.  How Did Cooperative Behavior Evolve? , 2005, Science.

[5]  Lin Wang,et al.  Evolutionary games on multilayer networks: a colloquium , 2015, The European Physical Journal B.

[6]  Yu Kang,et al.  Social diversity promotes cooperation in spatial multigames , 2017 .

[7]  G. Szabó,et al.  Phase diagrams for an evolutionary prisoner's dilemma game on two-dimensional lattices. , 2005, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[8]  M. Perc.  Transition from Gaussian to Levy distributions of stochastic payoff variations in the spatial prisoner's dilemma game. , 2007, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[9]  Attila Szolnoki,et al.  Self-organization towards optimally interdependent networks by means of coevolution , 2014, ArXiv.

[10]  M. Perc,et al.  Social diversity and promotion of cooperation in the spatial prisoner's dilemma game. , 2007, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[11]  Wenxu Wang,et al.  Memory-based snowdrift game on networks. , 2006, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[12]  H. Ohtsuki,et al.  Breaking the symmetry between interaction and replacement in evolutionary dynamics on graphs. , 2007, Physical review letters.

[13]  Attila Szolnoki,et al.  Making new connections towards cooperation in the prisoner's dilemma game , 2008, 0811.4372.

[14]  Brauchli,et al.  Evolution of cooperation in spatially structured populations , 1999, Journal of theoretical biology.

[15]  Martin A. Nowak,et al.  Evolutionary dynamics on any population structure , 2016, Nature.

[16]  J. Eisert,et al.  Quantum Games and Quantum Strategies , 1998, quant-ph/9806088.

[17]  C. Hauert,et al.  Game theory and physics , 2005 .

[18]  R M May,et al.  The evolution of cooperation , 1981, Nature.

[19]  M. Nowak,et al.  Evolutionary games and spatial chaos , 1992, Nature.

[20]  Pak Ming Hui,et al.  Analytic approach to co-evolving dynamics in complex networks: dissatisfied adaptive snowdrift game , 2011 .

[21]  Attila Szolnoki,et al.  Evolutionary dynamics of cooperation in neutral populations , 2017, ArXiv.

[22]  Josef Hofbauer,et al.  Evolutionary Games and Population Dynamics , 1998 .

[23]  S Redner,et al.  Evolutionary dynamics on degree-heterogeneous graphs. , 2006, Physical review letters.

[24]  Attila Szolnoki,et al.  Coevolutionary Games - A Mini Review , 2009, Biosyst..

[25]  J M Smith,et al.  Evolution and the theory of games , 1976 .

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

[27]  M. Nowak.  Five Rules for the Evolution of Cooperation , 2006, Science.

[28]  Chen Xu,et al.  Networking effects on evolutionary snowdrift game in networks with fixed degrees , 2007 .

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

[30]  B. Skyrms.  The Stag Hunt and the Evolution of Social Structure , 2003 .

[31]  U. Fischbacher,et al.  The nature of human altruism , 2003, Nature.

[32]  F. C. Santos,et al.  Scale-free networks provide a unifying framework for the emergence of cooperation. , 2005, Physical review letters.

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

[34]  A. Rapoport,et al.  Prisoner's Dilemma , 1965 .

[35]  Martin A. Nowak,et al.  Game-dynamical aspects of the prisoner's dilemma , 1989 .

[36]  Attila Szolnoki,et al.  Resolving social dilemmas on evolving random networks , 2009, 0910.1905.