Effects of ensemble action selection on the evolution of iterated prisoner's dilemma game strategies

Iterated prisoner's dilemma (IPD) games have been frequently used for examining the evolution of cooperative game strategies. It has been pointed out in some studies that the choice of a representation scheme (i.e., coding mechanism) has a large effect on the evolution. A choice of a different representation scheme often leads to totally different results. In those studies on IPD games, a single representation scheme is assigned to all players. That is, all players have the same representation scheme. In our former studies, we reported experimental results in an inhomogeneous setting where a different representation scheme was assigned to each player. The evolution of cooperation among different types of game strategies was examined. In this paper, we report experimental results in another interesting setting where each player is assumed to have multiple strategies with different representation schemes. The next action of each player is determined by a majority vote by its strategies. That is, each player is assumed to have an ensemble decision making system. Experimental results in such an ensemble IPD model are compared with those in the standard IPD model where each player has a single strategy.

[1]  Hisao Ishibuchi,et al.  Evolution of iterated prisoner's dilemma game strategies in structured demes under random pairing in game playing , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[2]  Hisao Ishibuchi,et al.  Effects of configuration of agents with different strategy representations on the evolution of cooperative behavior in a spatial IPD game , 2011, 2011 IEEE Conference on Computational Intelligence and Games (CIG'11).

[3]  Hisao Ishibuchi,et al.  Evolution of Strategies With Different Representation Schemes in a Spatial Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma Game , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Computational Intelligence and AI in Games.

[4]  Daniel A. Ashlock,et al.  Graph-based evolutionary algorithms , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[5]  Zhigang Chen,et al.  Memory-based evolutionary game on small-world network with tunable heterogeneity , 2010 .

[6]  Jose L. Muñoz,et al.  A game theoretic trust model for on-line distributed evolution of cooperation inMANETs , 2011, J. Netw. Comput. Appl..

[7]  David B. Fogel,et al.  Evolving Behaviors in the Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma , 1993, Evolutionary Computation.

[8]  P. Grim Spatialization and greater generosity in the stochastic Prisoner's Dilemma. , 1996, Bio Systems.

[9]  Robert Axelrod,et al.  The Evolution of Strategies in the Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma , 2001 .

[10]  Daniel A. Ashlock,et al.  Cooperation in Prisoner's Dilemma on Graphs , 2007, 2007 IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Games.

[11]  Hisao Ishibuchi,et al.  Evolution of cooperative strategies for iterated prisoner's dilemma on networks , 2013, 2013 Fifth International Conference on Computational Aspects of Social Networks.

[12]  Hisao Ishibuchi,et al.  Evolution of strategies in a spatial IPD game with a number of different representation schemes , 2012, 2012 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.

[13]  Eun-Youn Kim,et al.  Understanding representational sensitivity in the iterated prisoner's dilemma with fingerprints , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews).

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