Multiple effect of social influence on cooperation in interdependent network games

The social influence exists widely in the human society, where individual decision-making process (from congressional election to electronic commerce) may be affected by the attitude and behavior of others belonging to different social networks. Here, we couple the snowdrift (SD) game and the prisoner’s dilemma (PD) game on two interdependent networks, where strategies in both games are associated by social influence to mimick the majority rule. More accurately, individuals’ strategies updating refers to social learning (based on payoff difference) and above-mentioned social influence (related with environment of interdependent group), which is controlled by social influence strength s. Setting s = 0 decouples the networks and returns the traditional network game; while its increase involves the interactions between networks. By means of numerous Monte Carlo simulations, we find that such a mechanism brings multiple influence to the evolution of cooperation. Small s leads to unequal cooperation level in both games, because social learning is still the main updating rule for most players. Though intermediate and large s guarantees the synchronized evolution of strategy pairs, cooperation finally dies out and reaches a completely dominance in both cases. Interestingly, these observations are attributed to the expansion of cooperation clusters. Our work may provide a new understanding to the emergence of cooperation in intercorrelated social systems.

[1]  Jukka-Pekka Onnela,et al.  Spontaneous emergence of social influence in online systems , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[2]  G. Szabó,et al.  Cooperation enhanced by inhomogeneous activity of teaching for evolutionary Prisoner's Dilemma games , 2006, q-bio/0610001.

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

[4]  Z. Wang,et al.  The structure and dynamics of multilayer networks , 2014, Physics Reports.

[5]  J. Cuesta,et al.  Heterogeneous networks do not promote cooperation when humans play a Prisoner’s Dilemma , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[6]  H. Stanley,et al.  Robustness of a partially interdependent network formed of clustered networks. , 2013, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[7]  M. Milinski,et al.  Reputation helps solve the ‘tragedy of the commons’ , 2002, Nature.

[8]  Attila Szolnoki,et al.  Information sharing promotes prosocial behaviour , 2013, ArXiv.

[9]  J Gómez-Gardeñes,et al.  Dynamical organization of cooperation in complex topologies. , 2007, Physical review letters.

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

[11]  J. F. F. Mendes,et al.  Biased imitation in coupled evolutionary games in interdependent networks , 2014, Scientific Reports.

[12]  R. Axelrod,et al.  Evolutionary Dynamics , 2004 .

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

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

[15]  Attila Szolnoki,et al.  Coevolutionary success-driven multigames , 2014, ArXiv.

[16]  Attila Szolnoki,et al.  Evolutionary dynamics of group interactions on structured populations: a review , 2013, Journal of The Royal Society Interface.

[17]  Andrea Baronchelli,et al.  Connect and win: The role of social networks in political elections , 2012, ArXiv.

[18]  Manfred Milinski,et al.  The Calculus of Selfishness , 2011 .

[19]  Cameron Marlow,et al.  A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization , 2012, Nature.

[20]  S. Kokubo,et al.  Universal scaling for the dilemma strength in evolutionary games. , 2015, Physics of life reviews.

[21]  Sungmin Lee,et al.  Cooperation, structure, and hierarchy in multiadaptive games. , 2011, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

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

[23]  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.

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

[25]  E. Wilson,et al.  Eusociality: origin and consequences. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[26]  Zhen Wang,et al.  Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking in Interdependent Networked Game , 2014, Scientific Reports.

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

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

[29]  R Sevilla-Escoboza,et al.  Synchronization of interconnected networks: the role of connector nodes. , 2014, Physical review letters.

[30]  Attila Szolnoki,et al.  Evolution of public cooperation on interdependent networks: The impact of biased utility functions , 2012, ArXiv.

[31]  Ignacio Gomez Portillo,et al.  Cooperative networks overcoming defectors by social influence , 2014 .

[32]  Rida Laraki,et al.  A theory of measuring, electing, and ranking , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[33]  Attila Szolnoki,et al.  Optimal interdependence between networks for the evolution of cooperation , 2013, Scientific Reports.

[34]  D. Helbing,et al.  How social influence can undermine the wisdom of crowd effect , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[35]  Ting Chen,et al.  Nonequilibrium phase transitions in a model with social influence of inflexible units , 2007 .

[36]  Dirk Helbing,et al.  How Natural Selection Can Create Both Self- and Other-Regarding Preferences, and Networked Minds , 2013, Scientific Reports.

[37]  Attila Szolnoki,et al.  Conformity enhances network reciprocity in evolutionary social dilemmas , 2014, Journal of The Royal Society Interface.

[38]  Yamir Moreno,et al.  Cooperation in scale-free networks with limited associative capacities. , 2011, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[39]  Gaoxi Xiao,et al.  Epidemics spreading in interconnected complex networks , 2012 .

[40]  K. Foster,et al.  Kin selection is the key to altruism. , 2006, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[41]  Zhi-Xi Wu,et al.  Impact of conformity on the evolution of cooperation in the prisoner’s dilemma game , 2013 .

[42]  Long Wang,et al.  Promotion of cooperation induced by appropriate payoff aspirations in a small-world networked game. , 2008, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[43]  Harry Eugene Stanley,et al.  Catastrophic cascade of failures in interdependent networks , 2009, Nature.

[44]  Conrado J. Pérez Vicente,et al.  Diffusion dynamics on multiplex networks , 2012, Physical review letters.

[45]  Attila Szolnoki,et al.  Restricted connections among distinguished players support cooperation. , 2008, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[46]  Matjaz Perc,et al.  Spreading of cooperative behaviour across interdependent groups , 2013, Scientific Reports.

[47]  Attila Szolnoki,et al.  Interdependent network reciprocity in evolutionary games , 2013, Scientific Reports.

[48]  V. Smith,et al.  A compensation election for binary social choice , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[49]  Erwin Frey,et al.  Mobility, fitness collection, and the breakdown of cooperation. , 2013, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[50]  Kevin Lewis,et al.  Social selection and peer influence in an online social network , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.