Optimality under noise: higher memory strategies for the alternating prisoner's dilemma
- PMID: 11419957
- DOI: 10.1006/jtbi.2001.2337
Optimality under noise: higher memory strategies for the alternating prisoner's dilemma
Abstract
The Alternating Prisoner's Dilemma is a variant of the iterated Prisoner's Dilemma in which the players alternate in the roles of actor and recipient. We searched for strategies which are "optimal" in the Alternating Prisoner's Dilemma with noise (a non-zero probability that a player's decision will be transmitted incorrectly). In order to achieve success against a variety of other strategies, a strategy must be "self-cooperating" (able to achieve mutual cooperation with its clone), "C-exploiting" (able to exploit unconditional cooperators), and "D-unexploitable" (able to resist exploitation by defectors). It must also have high evolutionary "dominance", a general measure of evolutionary performance which considers both resistance to invasion and the ability to invade other strategies. A strategy which meets these optimality criteria can evolve cooperation by invading a population of defectors and establishing a stable cooperative society. Most of the strategies commonly discussed in the Alternating Prisoner's Dilemma literature are low-memory strategies such as Tit For Tat, Pavlov, and Firm But Fair, but none of these strategies can simultaneously meet all of the optimality criteria. However, we discovered a class of higher memory "Firm Pavlov" strategies, which not only meet our stringent optimality criteria, but also achieve remarkable success in round-robin tournaments and evolutionary interactions. These higher memory strategies are friendly enough to cooperate with their clone, pragmatic enough to exploit unconditional cooperators, and wary enough to resist exploitation by defectors: they are truly "optimal under noise" in the Alternating Prisoner's Dilemma.
Copyright 2001 Academic Press.
Similar articles
-
The continuous Prisoner's dilemma: II. Linear reactive strategies with noise.J Theor Biol. 1999 Oct 7;200(3):323-38. doi: 10.1006/jtbi.1999.0997. J Theor Biol. 1999. PMID: 10527721
-
Natural selection of memory-one strategies for the iterated prisoner's dilemma.J Theor Biol. 2000 Apr 21;203(4):335-55. doi: 10.1006/jtbi.2000.1089. J Theor Biol. 2000. PMID: 10736212
-
A strategy of win-stay, lose-shift that outperforms tit-for-tat in the Prisoner's Dilemma game.Nature. 1993 Jul 1;364(6432):56-8. doi: 10.1038/364056a0. Nature. 1993. PMID: 8316296
-
Resolving the iterated prisoner's dilemma: theory and reality.J Evol Biol. 2011 Aug;24(8):1628-39. doi: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2011.02307.x. Epub 2011 May 23. J Evol Biol. 2011. PMID: 21599777 Review.
-
Spatialization and greater generosity in the stochastic Prisoner's Dilemma.Biosystems. 1996;37(1-2):3-17. doi: 10.1016/0303-2647(95)01541-8. Biosystems. 1996. PMID: 8924636 Review.
Cited by
-
Memory-n strategies of direct reciprocity.Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017 May 2;114(18):4715-4720. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1621239114. Epub 2017 Apr 18. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017. PMID: 28420786 Free PMC article.
-
Co-action provides rational basis for the evolutionary success of Pavlovian strategies.Sci Rep. 2016 Aug 1;6:30831. doi: 10.1038/srep30831. Sci Rep. 2016. PMID: 27476604 Free PMC article.
-
Tit-for-tat or win-stay, lose-shift?J Theor Biol. 2007 Aug 7;247(3):574-80. doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2007.03.027. Epub 2007 Mar 24. J Theor Biol. 2007. PMID: 17481667 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources