Paper detail

How can social herding enhance cooperation?

We study a system in which N agents have to decide between two strategies θ_i (i \in 1... N), for defection or cooperation, when interacting with other n agents (either spatial neighbors or randomly chosen ones). After each round, they update their strategy responding nonlinearly to two different information sources: (i) the payoff a_i(θ_i, f_i) received from the strategic interaction with their n counterparts, (ii) the fraction f_i of cooperators in this interaction. For the latter response, we assume social herding, i.e. agents adopt their strategy based on the frequencies of the different strategies in their neighborhood, without taking into account the consequences of this decision. We note that f_i already determines the payoff, so there is no additional information assumed. A parameter ζdefines to what level agents take the two different information sources into account. For the strategic interaction, we assume a Prisoner's Dilemma game, i.e. one in which defection is the evolutionary stable strategy. However, if the additional dimension of social herding is taken into account, we find instead a stable outcome where cooperators are the majority. By means of agent-based computer simulations and analytical investigations, we evaluate the critical conditions for this transition towards cooperation. We find that, in addition to a high degree of social herding, there has to be a nonlinear response to the fraction of cooperators. We argue that the transition to cooperation in our model is based on less information, i.e. on agents which are not informed about the payoff matrix, and therefore rely on just observing the strategy of others, to adopt it. By designing the right mechanisms to respond to this information, the transition to cooperation can be remarkably enhanced.

preprint2012arXivOpen 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.