Paper detail

Hierarchical Prisoner's Dilemma in Hierarchical Public-Goods Game

The dilemma in cooperation is one of the major concerns in game theory. In a public-goods game, each individual pays a cost for cooperation, or to prevent defection, and receives a reward from the collected cost in a group. Thus, defection is beneficial for each individual, while cooperation is beneficial for the group. Now, groups (say, countries) consisting of individual players also play games. To study such a multi-level game, we introduce a hierarchical public-goods (HPG) game in which two groups compete for finite resources by utilizing costs collected from individuals in each group. Analyzing this HPG game, we found a hierarchical prisoner's dilemma, in which groups choose the defection policy (say, armaments) as a Nash strategy to optimize each group's benefit, while cooperation optimizes the total benefit. On the other hand, for each individual within a group, refusing to pay the cost (say, tax) is a Nash strategy, which turns to be a cooperation policy for the group, thus leading to a hierarchical dilemma. Here, the reward received by one group increases with the population, as does the collected cost. In spite of this, we find that there exists an optimal group size that maximizes its payoff. Furthermore, when the population asymmetry between two groups is large, a smaller group will choose a cooperation policy (say, disarmament) to avoid excessive response from the larger group, which leads to the resolution of the prisoner's dilemma between the groups. The relevance of the HPG game to policy selection in society and the optimal size in human or animal groups are discussed accordingly.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.