Source author record

Valerio Capraro

Valerio Capraro appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

34works
17topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

34 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

A Synergy of Institutional Incentives and Networked Structures in Evolutionary Game Dynamics of Multi-agent Systems

Understanding the emergence of prosocial behaviours (e.g., cooperation and trust) among self-interested agents is an important problem in many disciplines. Network structure and institutional incentives (e.g., punishing antisocial agents) are known to promote prosocial behaviours, when acting in isolation, one mechanism being present at a time. Here we study the interplay between these two mechanisms to see whether they are independent, interfering or synergetic. Using evolutionary game theory, we show that punishing antisocial agents and a regular networked structure not only promote prosocial behaviours among agents playing the trust game, but they also interplay with each other, leading to interference or synergy, depending on the game parameters. Synergy emerges on a wider range of parameters than interference does. In this domain, the combination of incentives and networked structure improves the efficiency of incentives, yielding prosocial behaviours at a lower cost than the incentive does alone. This has a significant implication in the promotion of prosocial behaviours in multi-agent systems.

preprint2020arXiv

"Do the Right Thing" for Whom? An Experiment on Ingroup Favouritism, Group Assorting and Moral Suasion

In this paper we investigate the effect of moral suasion on ingroup favouritism. We report a well-powered, pre-registered, two-stage 2x2 mixed-design experiment. In the first stage, groups are formed on the basis of how participants answer to a set of questions, concerning non-morally relevant issues in one treatment (assorting on non-moral preferences), and morally relevant issues in another treatment (assorting on moral preferences). In the second stage, participants choose how to split a given amount of money between participants of their own group and participants of the other group, first in the baseline setting and then in a setting where they are told to do what they believe to be morally right (moral suasion). Our main results are: (i) in the baseline, participants tend to favour their own group to a greater extent when groups are assorted according to moral preferences, compared to when they are assorted according to non-moral preferences; (ii) the net effect of moral suasion is to decrease ingroup favouritism, but there is also a non-negligible proportion of participants for whom moral suasion increases ingroup favouritism; (iii) the effect of moral suasion is substantially stable across group assorting and four pre-registered individual characteristics (gender, political orientation, religiosity, pro-life vs pro-choice ethical convictions).

preprint2020arXiv

Does observability amplify sensitivity to moral frames? Evaluating a reputation-based account of moral preferences

A growing body of work suggests that people are sensitive to moral framing in economic games involving prosociality, suggesting that people hold moral preferences for doing the "right thing". What gives rise to these preferences? Here, we evaluate the explanatory power of a reputation-based account, which proposes that people respond to moral frames because they are motivated to look good in the eyes of others. Across two pre-registered experiments (total N = 3,610), we investigated whether reputational incentives amplify sensitivity to framing effects. Both experiments manipulated (i) whether moral or neutral framing was used to describe a Trade-Off Game (in which participants chose between prioritizing equality or efficiency) and (ii) whether Trade-Off Game choices were observable to a social partner in a subsequent Trust Game. We find that framing effects are relatively insensitive to reputational incentives: observability did not significantly amplify sensitivity to moral framing. However, our results are not inconsistent with the possibility that observability has some amplification effect; quantitatively, the observed framing effect was 74% as large when decisions were private as when they were observable. These results suggest that moral frames may tap into moral preferences that are relatively deeply internalized, and that power of moral frames to promote prosociality may not be strongly enhanced by making the morally-framed behavior observable to others.

preprint2020arXiv

Lying on networks: The role of structure and topology in promoting honesty

Lies can have a negating impact on governments, companies, and the society as a whole. Understanding the dynamics of lying is therefore of crucial importance across different fields of research. While lying has been studied before in well-mixed populations, it is a fact that real interactions are rarely well-mixed. Indeed, they are usually structured and thus best described by networks. Here we therefore use the Monte Carlo method to study the evolution of lying in the sender-receiver game in a one-parameter family of networks, systematically covering complete networks, small-world networks, and one-dimensional rings. We show that lies which benefit the sender at a cost to the receiver, the so-called black lies, are less likely to proliferate on networks than they do in well-mixed populations. Honesty is thus more likely to evolve, but only when the benefit for the sender is smaller than the cost for the receiver. Moreover, this effect is particularly strong in small-world networks, but less so in the one-dimensional ring. For lies that favor the receiver at a cost to the sender, the so-called altruistic white lies, we show that honesty is also more likely to evolve than it is in well-mixed populations. But contrary to black lies, this effect is more expressed in the one-dimensional ring, whereas in small-world networks it is present only when the cost to the sender is greater than the benefit for the receiver. Lastly, for lies that benefit both the sender and the receiver, the so-called Pareto white lies, we show that the network structure actually favors the evolution of lying, but this only when the benefit for the sender is slightly greater than the benefit for the receiver. In this case again the small-world topology acts as an amplifier of the effect, while other network topologies fail to do the same.

preprint2020arXiv

Priming reasoning increases intentions to wear a face covering to slow down COVID-19 transmission

Finding mechanisms to promote the use of face masks is fundamental during the second phase of the COVID-19 pandemic response, when shelter-in-place rules are relaxed and some segments of the population are allowed to circulate more freely. Here we report three pre-registered studies (total N = 1,920), using an heterogenous sample of people living in the USA, showing that priming people to "rely on their reasoning" rather than to "rely on their emotions" significantly increases their intentions to wear a face covering. Compared to the baseline, priming reasoning promotes intentions to wear a face covering, whereas priming emotion has no significant effect. These findings have theoretical and practical implications. Practically, they offer a simple and scalable intervention to promote intentions to wear a face mask. Theoretically, they shed light on the cognitive basis of intentions to wear a face covering.

preprint2020arXiv

The effect of messaging and gender on intentions to wear a face covering to slow down COVID-19 transmission

Now that various countries are or will soon be moving towards relaxing shelter-in-place rules, it is important that people use a face covering, to avoid an exponential resurgence of the spreading of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Here we report a pre-registered online experiment (N=2,459) using a heterogenous, although not representative, sample of people living in the USA, where we test the relative effect of messages highlighting that the coronavirus is a threat to "you" vs "your family" vs "your community" vs "your country" on self-reported intentions to wear a face covering. Results show that focusing on "your community" promotes intentions to wear a face covering relative to the baseline; the trend is the same when comparing "your community" to the other conditions, but not significant. We also conducted pre-registered analyses of gender differences on intentions to wear a face covering. We find that men less than women intend to wear a face covering, but this difference almost disappears in counties where wearing a face covering is mandatory. We also find that men less than women believe that they will be seriously affected by the coronavirus, and this partly mediates gender differences in intentions to wear a face covering (this is particularly ironic because official statistics actually show that men are affected by the COVID-19 more seriously than women). Finally, we also find gender differences in self-reported negative emotions felt when wearing a face covering. Men more than women agree that wearing a face covering is shameful, not cool, a sign of weakness, and a stigma; and these gender differences also mediate gender differences in intentions to wear a face covering.

preprint2020arXiv

The effect of norm-based messages on reading and understanding COVID-19 pandemic response governmental rules

The new coronavirus disease (COVID-19) threatens the lives of millions of people around the world, making it the largest health threat in recent times. Billions of people around the world are asked to adhere to strict shelter-in-place rules, finalised to slow down the spread of the virus. Appeals and messages are being used by leaders and policy-makers to promote pandemic response. Given the stakes at play, it is thus important for social scientists to explore which messages are most effective in promoting pandemic response. In fact, some papers in the last month have explored the effect of several messages on people's intentions to engage in pandemic response behaviour. In this paper, we make two contributions. First, we explore the effect of messages on people's actual engagement, and not on intentions. Specifically, our dependent variables are the level of understanding of official COVID-19 pandemic response governmental informative panels, measured through comprehension questions, and the time spent on reading these rules. Second, we test a novel set of appeals built through the theory of norms. One message targets the personal norm (what people think is the right thing to do), one targets the descriptive norm (what people think others are doing), and one targets the injunctive norm (what people think others approve or disapprove of). Our experiment is conducted online with a representative (with respect to gender, age, and location) sample of Italians. Norms are made salient using a flier. We find that norm-based fliers had no effect on comprehension and on time spent on the panels. These results suggest that norm-based interventions through fliers have very little impact on people's reading and understanding of COVID-19 pandemic response governmental rules.

preprint2020arXiv

The evolution of trust and trustworthiness

Trust and trustworthiness form the basis for continued social and economic interactions, and they are also fundamental for cooperation, fairness, honesty, and indeed for many other forms of prosocial and moral behavior. However, trust entails risks, and building a trustworthy reputation requires effort. So how did trust and trustworthiness evolve, and under which conditions do they thrive? To find answers, we operationalize trust and trustworthiness using the trust game with the trustor's investment and the trustee's return of the investment as the two key parameters. We study this game on different networks, including the complete network, random and scale-free networks, and in the well-mixed limit. We show that in all but one case the network structure has little effect on the evolution of trust and trustworthiness. Specifically, for well-mixed populations, lattices, random and scale-free networks, we find that trust never evolves, while trustworthiness evolves with some probability depending on the game parameters and the updating dynamics. Only for the scale-free network with degree non-normalized dynamics, we find parameter values for which trust evolves but trustworthiness does not, as well as values for which both trust and trustworthiness evolve. We conclude with a discussion about mechanisms that could lead to the evolution of trust and outline directions for future work.

preprint2016arXiv

Gender differences in altruism: Expectations, actual behaviour and accuracy of beliefs

Previous research shows that women are more altruist than men in dictator game experiments. Yet, little is known whether women are expected to be more altruist than men. Here we elicit third-parties' beliefs about dictators' donations conditional on knowing the gender of the dictator. Our data provide evidence of three main findings: (i) women are expected to be more altruist than men; (ii) both men and women have correct beliefs about the level of altruism among men; and (iii) both men and women overestimate the level of altruism among women. In doing so, our results uncover a perception gap according to which, although women are more altruist than men, they are expected to be even more altruist than they actually are.

preprint2016arXiv

To know or not to know? How looking at payoffs signals selfish behavior

In daily life, subjects often face a social dilemma in two stages. In Stage 1, they recognize the social dilemma structure of the decision problem at hand (a tension between personal interest and collective interest); in Stage 2, they have to choose between gathering additional information to learn the exact payoffs corresponding to each of the two options or making a choice without looking at the payoffs. While previous theoretical research suggests that the mere act of considering one's strategic options in a social dilemma will be met with distrust, no experimental study has tested this hypothesis. What does "looking at payoffs" signal in observers? Do observers' beliefs actually match decision makers' intentions? Experiment 1 shows that the actual action of looking at payoffs signals selfish behavior, but it does not actually mean so. Experiments 2 and 3 show that, when the action of looking at payoffs is replaced by a self-report question asking the extent to which participants look at payoffs in their everyday lives, subjects in high looking mode are indeed more selfish than those in low looking mode, and this is correctly predicted by observers. These results support Rand and colleagues' Social Heuristics Hypothesis and the novel "cooperate without looking" model by Yoeli, Hoffman, and Nowak. However, Experiment 1 shows that actual looking may lead to different results, possibly caused by the emergence of a moral cleansing effect.

preprint2016arXiv

Translucent Players: Explaining Cooperative Behavior in Social Dilemmas

In the last few decades, numerous experiments have shown that humans do not always behave so as to maximize their material payoff. Cooperative behavior when non-cooperation is a dominant strategy (with respect to the material payoffs) is particularly puzzling. Here we propose a novel approach to explain cooperation, assuming what Halpern and Pass call translucent players. Typically, players are assumed to be opaque, in the sense that a deviation by one player in a normal-form game does not affect the strategies used by other players. But a player may believe that if he switches from one strategy to another, the fact that he chooses to switch may be visible to the other players. For example, if he chooses to defect in Prisoner's Dilemma, the other player may sense his guilt. We show that by assuming translucent players, we can recover many of the regularities observed in human behavior in well-studied games such as Prisoner's Dilemma, Traveler's Dilemma, Bertrand Competition, and the Public Goods game.

preprint2015arXiv

Cooperative Equilibrium beyond Social Dilemmas: Pareto Solvable Games

A recently introduced concept of "cooperative equilibrium", based on the assumption that players have a natural attitude to cooperation, has been proven a powerful tool in predicting human behaviour in social dilemmas. In this paper, we extend this idea to more general game models, termed "Pareto solvable" games, which in particular include the Nash Bargaining Problem and the Ultimatum Game. We show that games in this class possess a unique pure cooperative equilibrium. Furthermore, for the Ultimatum Game, this notion appears to be strongly correlated with a suitably defined variant of the Dictator Game. We support this observation with the results of a behavioural experiment conducted using Amazon Mechanical Turk, which demonstrates that our approach allows for making statistically precise predictions of average behaviour in such settings.

preprint2015arXiv

Does telling white lies signal pro-social preferences?

The opportunity to tell a white lie (i.e., a lie that benefits another person) generates a moral conflict between two opposite moral dictates, one pushing towards telling always the truth and the other pushing towards helping others. Here we study how people resolve this moral conflict. What does telling a white lie signal about a person's pro-social tendencies? To answer this question, we conducted a two-stage 2x2 experiment. In the first stage, we used a Deception Game to measure aversion to telling a Pareto white lie (i.e., a lie that helps both the liar and the listener), and aversion to telling an altruistic white lie (i.e., a lie that helps the listener at the expense of the liar). In the second stage we measured altruistic tendencies using a Dictator Game and cooperative tendencies using a Prisoner's dilemma. We found three major results: (i) both altruism and cooperation are positively correlated with aversion to telling a Pareto white lie; (ii) both altruism and cooperation are negatively correlated with aversion to telling an altruistic white lie; (iii) men are more likely than women to tell an altruistic white lie, but not to tell a Pareto white lie. Our results shed light on the moral conflit between pro-sociality and truth-telling. In particular, the first finding suggests that a significant proportion of people have non-distributional notions of what the right thing to do is: irrespective of their economic consequences, they tell the truth, they cooperate, they share their money.

preprint2015arXiv

Group size effect on cooperation in one-shot social dilemmas II. Curvilinear effect

In a world in which many pressing global issues require large scale cooperation, understanding the group size effect on cooperative behavior is a topic of central importance. Yet, the nature of this effect remains largely unknown, with lab experiments insisting that it is either positive or negative or null, and field experiments suggesting that it is instead curvilinear. Here we shed light on this apparent contradiction by considering a novel class of public goods games inspired to the realistic scenario in which the natural output limits of the public good imply that the benefit of cooperation increases fast for early contributions and then decelerates. We report on a large lab experiment providing evidence that, in this case, group size has a curvilinear effect on cooperation, according to which intermediate-size groups cooperate more than smaller groups and more than larger groups. In doing so, our findings help fill the gap between lab experiments and field experiments and suggest concrete ways to promote large scale cooperation among people.

preprint2015arXiv

Introduction to Sofic and Hyperlinear groups and Connes' embedding conjecture

Sofic and hyperlinear groups are the countable discrete groups that can be approximated in a suitable sense by finite symmetric groups and groups of unitary matrices. These notions turned out to be very deep and fruitful, and stimulated in the last 15 years an impressive amount of research touching several seemingly distant areas of mathematics including geometric group theory, operator algebras, dynamical systems, graph theory, and more recently even quantum information theory. Several longstanding conjectures that are still open for arbitrary groups were settled in the case of sofic or hyperlinear groups. These achievements aroused the interest of an increasing number of researchers into some fundamental questions about the nature of these approximation properties. Many of such problems are to this day still open such as, outstandingly: Is there any countable discrete group that is not sofic or hyperlinear? A similar pattern can be found in the study of II_1 factors. In this case the famous conjecture due to Connes (commonly known as the Connes embedding conjecture) that any II_1 factor can be approximated in a suitable sense by matrix algebras inspired several breakthroughs in the understanding of II_1 factors, and stands out today as one of the major open problems in the field. The aim of these notes is to present in a uniform and accessible way some cornerstone results in the study of sofic and hyperlinear groups and the Connes embedding conjecture. The presentation is nonetheless self contained and accessible to any student or researcher with a graduate level mathematical background. An appendix by V. Pestov provides a pedagogically new introduction to the concepts of ultrafilters, ultralimits, and ultraproducts for those mathematicians who are not familiar with them, and aiming to make these concepts appear very natural.

preprint2015arXiv

On the axiomatization of convex subsets of Banach spaces

We prove that any convex-like structure in the sense of Nate Brown is affinely and isometrically isomorphic to a closed convex subset of a Banach space. This answers an open question of Brown. As an intermediate step, we identify Brown's algebraic axioms as equivalent to certain well-known axioms of abstract convexity. We conclude with a new characterization of convex subsets of Banach spaces.

preprint2015arXiv

Social setting, intuition, and experience in lab experiments interact to shape cooperative decision-making

Recent studies suggest that cooperative decision-making in one-shot interactions is a history-dependent dynamic process: promoting intuition versus deliberation has typically a positive effect on cooperation (dynamism) among people living in a cooperative setting and with no previous experience in economic games on cooperation (history-dependence). Here we report on a lab experiment exploring how these findings transfer to a non-cooperative setting. We find two major results: (i) promoting intuition versus deliberation has no effect on cooperative behavior among inexperienced subjects living in a non-cooperative setting; (ii) experienced subjects cooperate more than inexperienced subjects, but only under time pressure. These results suggest that cooperation is a learning process, rather than an instinctive impulse or a self-controlled choice, and that experience operates primarily via the channel of intuition. In doing so, our findings shed further light on the cognitive basis of human cooperative decision-making and provide further support for the recently proposed Social Heuristics Hypothesis.

preprint2014arXiv

Benevolent characteristics promote cooperative behaviour among humans

Cooperation is fundamental to the evolution of human society. We regularly observe cooperative behaviour in everyday life and in controlled experiments with anonymous people, even though standard economic models predict that they should deviate from the collective interest and act so as to maximise their own individual payoff. However, there is typically heterogeneity across subjects: some may cooperate, while others may not. Since individual factors promoting cooperation could be used by institutions to indirectly prime cooperation, this heterogeneity raises the important question of who these cooperators are. We have conducted a series of experiments to study whether benevolence, defined as a unilateral act of paying a cost to increase the welfare of someone else beyond one's own, is related to cooperation in a subsequent one-shot anonymous Prisoner's dilemma. Contrary to the predictions of the widely used inequity aversion models, we find that benevolence does exist and a large majority of people behave this way. We also find benevolence to be correlated with cooperative behaviour. Finally, we show a causal link between benevolence and cooperation: priming people to think positively about benevolent behaviour makes them significantly more cooperative than priming them to think malevolently. Thus benevolent people exist and cooperate more.

preprint2014arXiv

Do good actions inspire good actions in others?

Actions such as sharing food and cooperating to reach a common goal have played a fundamental role in the evolution of human societies. These good actions may not maximise the actor's payoff, but they maximise the other's payoff. Consequently, their existence is puzzling for evolutionary theories. Why should you make an effort to help others, even when no reward seems to be at stake? Indeed, experiments typically show that humans are heterogeneous: some may help others, while others may not. With the aim of favouring the emergence of 'successful cultures', a number of studies has recently investigated what mechanisms promote the evolution of a particular good action. But still little is known about if and how good actions can spread from person to person. For instance, does being recipient of an altruistic act increase your probability of being cooperative with others? Plato's quote, 'Good actions give strength to ourselves and inspire good actions in others', suggests that is possible. We have conducted an experiment on Amazon Mechanical Turk to test this mechanism using economic games. We have measured willingness to be cooperative through a standard Prisoner's dilemma and willingness to act altruistically using a binary Dictator game. In the baseline treatments, the endowments needed to play were given by the experimenters, as usual; in the control treatments, they came from a good action made by someone else. Across four different comparisons and a total of 572 subjects, we have never found a significant increase of cooperation or altruism when the endowment came from a good action. We conclude that good actions do not necessarily inspire good actions in others, at least in the ideal scenario of a lab experiment with anonymous subjects.

preprint2014arXiv

Group size effect on cooperation in social dilemmas

Social dilemmas are central to human society. Depletion of natural resources, climate protection, security of energy supply, and workplace collaborations are all examples of social dilemmas. Since cooperative behaviour in a social dilemma is individually costly, Nash equilibrium predicts that humans should not cooperate. Yet experimental studies show that people do cooperate even in anonymous one-shot interactions. In spite of the large number of participants in many modern social dilemmas, little is known about the effect of group size on cooperation. Does larger group size favour or prevent cooperation? We address this problem both experimentally and theoretically. Experimentally, we find that there is no general answer: it depends on the strategic situation. Specifically, we find that larger groups are more cooperative in the Public Goods game, but less cooperative in the N-person Prisoner's dilemma. Theoretically, we show that this behaviour is not consistent with either the Fehr & Schmidt model or (a one-parameter version of) the Charness & Rabin model, but it is consistent with the cooperative equilibrium model introduced by the second author.

preprint2014arXiv

Heuristics guide the implementation of social preferences in one-shot Prisoner's Dilemma experiments

Cooperation in one-shot anonymous interactions is a widely documented aspect of human behaviour. Here we shed light on the motivations behind this behaviour by experimentally exploring cooperation in a one-shot continuous-strategy Prisoner's Dilemma (i.e. one-shot two-player Public Goods Game). We examine the distribution of cooperation amounts, and how that distribution varies based on the benefit-to-cost ratio of cooperation (b/c). Interestingly, we find a trimodal distribution at all b/c values investigated. Increasing b/c decreases the fraction of participants engaging in zero cooperation and increases the fraction engaging in maximal cooperation, suggesting a role for efficiency concerns. However, a substantial fraction of participants consistently engage in 50% cooperation regardless of b/c. The presence of these persistent 50% cooperators is surprising, and not easily explained by standard models of social preferences. We present evidence that this behaviour is a result of social preferences guided by simple decision heuristics, rather than the rational examination of payoffs assumed by most social preference models. We also find a strong correlation between play in the Prisoner's Dilemma and in a subsequent Dictator Game, confirming previous findings suggesting a common prosocial motivation underlying altruism and cooperation.

preprint2014arXiv

The emergence of hyper-altruistic behaviour in conflictual situations

Situations where people have to decide between hurting themselves or another person are at the core of many individual and global conflicts. Yet little is known about how people behave when facing these situations in the lab. Here we report a large experiment in which participants could either take $x$ dollars from another anonymous participant or give $y$ dollars to the same participant. Depending on the treatments, participants could also exit the game without making any decision, but paying a cost. Across different protocols and parameter specifications, we provide evidence of three regularities: (i) when exiting is allowed and costless, subjects tend to exit the game; (ii) females are more likely than males to exit the game, but only when the cost is small; (iii) when exiting is not allowed, altruistic actions are more common than predicted by the dominant economic models. In particular, against the predictions of every dominant economic model, about one sixth of the subjects show hyper-altruistic tendencies, that is, they prefer giving $y$ rather than taking $x>y$. In doing so, our findings shed light on human decision-making in conflictual situations and suggest that economic models should be revised in order to take into account hyper-altruistic behaviour.

preprint2014arXiv

Translucent Players: Explaining Cooperative Behavior in Social Dilemmas

In the last few decades, numerous experiments have shown that humans do not always behave so as to maximize their material payoff. Cooperative behavior when non-cooperation is a dominant strategy (with respect to the material payoffs) is particularly puzzling. Here we propose a novel approach to explain cooperation, assuming what Halpern and Pass (2013) call "translucent players". Typically, players are assumed to be "opaque", in the sense that a deviation by one player does not affect the strategies used by other players. But a player may believe that if he switches from one strategy to another, the fact that he chooses to switch may be visible to the other players. For example, if he chooses to defect in Prisoner's Dilemma, the other player may sense his guilt. We show that by assuming translucent players, we can recover many of the regularities observed in human behavior in well-studied games such as Prisoner's Dilemma, Traveler's Dilemma, Bertrand Competition, and the Public Goods game.

preprint2013arXiv

A Model of Human Cooperation in Social Dilemmas

Social dilemmas are situations in which collective interests are at odds with private interests: pollution, depletion of natural resources, and intergroup conflicts, are at their core social dilemmas. Because of their multidisciplinarity and their importance, social dilemmas have been studied by economists, biologists, psychologists, sociologists, and political scientists. These studies typically explain tendency to cooperation by dividing people in proself and prosocial types, or appealing to forms of external control or, in iterated social dilemmas, to long-term strategies. But recent experiments have shown that cooperation is possible even in one-shot social dilemmas without forms of external control and the rate of cooperation typically depends on the payoffs. This makes impossible a predictive division between proself and prosocial people and proves that people have attitude to cooperation by nature. The key innovation of this article is in fact to postulate that humans have attitude to cooperation by nature and consequently they do not act a priori as single agents, as assumed by standard economic models, but they forecast how a social dilemma would evolve if they formed coalitions and then they act according to their most optimistic forecast. Formalizing this idea we propose the first predictive model of human cooperation able to organize a number of different experimental findings that are not explained by the standard model. We show also that the model makes satisfactorily accurate quantitative predictions of population average behavior in one-shot social dilemmas.

preprint2013arXiv

A notion of continuity in discrete spaces and applications

We propose a notion of continuous path for locally finite metric spaces, taking inspiration from the recent development of A-theory for locally finite connected graphs. We use this notion of continuity to derive an analogue in Z^2 of the Jordan curve theorem and to extend to a quite large class of locally finite metric spaces (containing all finite metric spaces) an inequality for the \ell^p-distortion of a metric space that has been recently proved by Pierre-Nicolas Jolissaint and Alain Valette for finite connected graphs.

preprint2013arXiv

A solution concept for games with altruism and cooperation

Over the years, numerous experiments have been accumulated to show that cooperation is not casual and depends on the payoffs of the game. These findings suggest that humans have attitude to cooperation by nature and the same person may act more or less cooperatively depending on the particular payoffs. In other words, people do not act a priori as single agents, but they forecast how the game would be played if they formed coalitions and then they play according to their best forecast. In this paper we formalize this idea and we define a new solution concept for one-shot normal form games. We prove that this \emph{cooperative equilibrium} exists for all finite games and it explains a number of different experimental findings, such as (1) the rate of cooperation in the Prisoner's dilemma depends on the cost-benefit ratio; (2) the rate of cooperation in the Traveler's dilemma depends on the bonus/penalty; (3) the rate of cooperation in the Publig Goods game depends on the pro-capite marginal return and on the numbers of players; (4) the rate of cooperation in the Bertrand competition depends on the number of players; (5) players tend to be fair in the bargaining problem; (6) players tend to be fair in the Ultimatum game; (7) players tend to be altruist in the Dictator game; (8) offers in the Ultimatum game are larger than offers in the Dictator game.

preprint2013arXiv

Cyclic Hilbert spaces and Connes' embedding problem

Let $M$ be a $II_1$-factor with trace $τ$, the linear subspaces of $L^2(M,τ)$ are not just common Hilbert spaces, but they have additional structure. We introduce the notion of a cyclic linear space by taking those properties as axioms. In Sec.2 we formulate the following problem: "does every cyclic Hilbert space embed into $L^2(M,τ)$, for some $M$?". An affirmative answer would imply the existence of an algorithm to check Connes' embedding Conjecture. In Sec.3 we make a first step towards the answer of the previous question.

preprint2013arXiv

Groups associated to $II_1$-factors

We extend recent work of the first named author, constructing a natural Hom semigroup associated to any pair of II$_1$-factors. This semigroup always satisfies cancelation, hence embeds into its Grothendieck group. When the target is an ultraproduct of a McDuff factor (e.g., $R^ω$), this Grothendieck group turns out to carry a natural vector space structure; in fact, it is a Banach space with natural actions of outer automorphism groups.

preprint2012arXiv

Amenability, locally finite spaces, and bi-lipschitz embeddings

We define the isoperimetric constant for any locally finite metric space and we study the property of having isoperimetric constant equal to zero. This property, called Small Neighborhood property, clearly extends amenability to any locally finite space. Therefore, we start making a comparison between this property and other notions of amenability for locally finite metric spaces that have been proposed by Gromov, Lafontaine and Pansu, by Ceccherini-Silberstein, Grigorchuk and de la Harpe and by Block and Weinberger. We discuss possible applications of the property SN in the study of embedding a metric space into another one. In particular, we propose three results: we prove that a certain class of metric graphs that are isometrically embeddable into Hilbert spaces must have the property SN. We also show, by a simple example, that this result is not true replacing property SN with amenability. As a second result, we prove that \emph{many} spaces with \emph{uniform bounded geometry} having a bi-lipschitz embedding into Euclidean spaces must have the property SN. Finally, we prove a Bourgain-like theorem for metric trees: a metric tree with uniform bounded geometry and without property SN does not have bi-lipschitz embeddings into finite-dimensional Hilbert spaces.

preprint2012arXiv

Optimal strategies for a game on amenable semigroups

The semigroup game is a two-person zero-sum game defined on a semigroup S as follows: Players 1 and 2 choose elements x and y in S, respectively, and player 1 receives a payoff f(xy) defined by a function f from S to [-1,1]. If the semigroup is amenable in the sense of Day and von Neumann, one can extend the set of classical strategies, namely countably additive probability measures on S, to include some finitely additive measures in a natural way. This extended game has a value and the players have optimal strategies. This theorem extends previous results for the multiplication game on a compact group or on the positive integers with a specific payoff. We also prove that the procedure of extending the set of allowed strategies preserves classical solutions: if a semigroup game has a classical solution, this solution solves also the extended game.

preprint2012arXiv

Solution of Wald's game using loadings and allowed strategies

We propose a new interpretation of the strange phenomena that some authors have observed about the Wald game. This interpretation is possible thanks to the new language of \emph{loadings} that Morrison and the author have introduced in a previous work. Using the theory of loadings and allowed strategies, we are also able to prove that Wald's game admits a \emph{natural} solution and, as one can expect, the game turns out to be fair for this solution. As a technical tool, we introduce the notion of \emph{embedding a game into another game} that could be of interest from a theoretical point of view. \emph{En passant} we find a very easy example of a game which is loadable in infinitely many different ways.

preprint2011arXiv

Topology on locally finite metric spaces

The necessity of a theory of General Topology and, most of all, of Algebraic Topology on locally finite metric spaces comes from many areas of research in both Applied and Pure Mathematics: Molecular Biology, Mathematical Chemistry, Computer Science, Topological Graph Theory and Metric Geometry. In this paper we propose the basic notions of such a theory and some applications: we replace the classical notions of continuous function, homeomorphism and homotopic equivalence with the notions of NPP-function, NPP-local-isomorphism and NPP-homotopy (NPP stands for Nearest Point Preserving); we also introduce the notion of NPP-isomorphism. We construct three invariants under NPP-isomorphisms and, in particular, we define the fundamental group of a locally finite metric space. As first applications, we propose the following: motivated by the longstanding question whether there is a purely metric condition which extends the notion of amenability of a group to any metric space, we propose the property SN (Small Neighborhood); motivated by some applicative problems in Computer Science, we prove the analog of the Jordan curve theorem in $\mathbb Z^2$; motivated by a question asked during a lecture at Lausanne, we extend to any locally finite metric space a recent inequality of P.N.Jolissaint and Valette regarding the $\ell_p$-distortion.

preprint2010arXiv

A Survey on Connes' Embedding Conjecture

In a very celebrated paper A. Connes has formulated a conjecture which is now one of the most important open problem in Operator Algebras. This importance comes from the works of many mathematicians who have found some unexpected equivalent statements showing as this conjecture is transversal to almost all the sub-specialization of Operator Algebras. In this survey I would like to give a more or less detailed description of all these approaches.