Evolution of commitment and level of participation in public goods games

被引:0
作者
The Anh Han
Luís Moniz Pereira
Tom Lenaerts
机构
[1] Teesside University,School of Computing
[2] Universidade Nova de Lisboa,NOVA Laboratory for Computer Science and Informatics (NOVA LINCS), Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia
[3] Université Libre de Bruxelles,MLG, Département d’Informatique
[4] Vrije Universiteit Brussel,AI lab, Computer Science Department
来源
Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems | 2017年 / 31卷
关键词
Commitment; Cooperation; Participation; Evolutionary game theory; Public goods games;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Before engaging in a group venture agents may require commitments from other members in the group, and based on the level of acceptance (participation) they can then decide whether it is worthwhile joining the group effort. Here, we show in the context of public goods games and using stochastic evolutionary game theory modelling, which implies imitation and mutation dynamics, that arranging prior commitments while imposing a minimal participation when interacting in groups induces agents to behave cooperatively. Our analytical and numerical results show that if the cost of arranging the commitment is sufficiently small compared to the cost of cooperation, commitment arranging behavior is frequent, leading to a high level of cooperation in the population. Moreover, an optimal participation level emerges depending both on the dilemma at stake and on the cost of arranging the commitment. Namely, the harsher the common good dilemma is, and the costlier it becomes to arrange the commitment, the more participants should explicitly commit to the agreement to ensure the success of the joint venture. Furthermore, considering that commitment deals may last for more than one encounter, we show that commitment proposers can be lenient in case of short-term agreements, yet should be strict in case of long-term interactions.
引用
收藏
页码:561 / 583
页数:22
相关论文
共 124 条
[1]  
Airiau S(2014)Emergence of conventions through social learning Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 28 779-804
[2]  
Sen S(2002)Rousseau’s whale hunt? Current Anthropology 43 533-559
[3]  
Villatoro D(1981)The evolution of cooperation Science 211 1390-1396
[4]  
Alvard MS(2015)Evolutionary dynamics of multi-agent learning: A survey Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 53 659-697
[5]  
Nolin DA(2015)First carrot, then stick: How the adaptive hybridization of incentives promotes cooperation Journal of The Royal Society Interface 12 20140935-386
[6]  
Axelrod R(1994)The effects of communication and commitment in a public goods social dilemma Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 60 367-77
[7]  
Hamilton W(2013)Enforcing compliance with environmental agreements in the absence of strong institutions: An experimental analysis Environmental and Resource Economics 54 63-994
[8]  
Bloembergen D(2000)Cooperation and punishment in public goods experiments American Economic Review 90 980-262
[9]  
Tuyls K(2005)Imitation processes with small mutations Journal of Economic Theory 131 251-5504
[10]  
Hennes D(2010)Evolutionary games in the multiverse Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 107 5500-383