Synergy and discounting of cooperation in social dilemmas

被引:247
作者
Hauert, C
Michor, F
Nowak, MA
Doebeli, M
机构
[1] Harvard Univ, Program Evolutionary Dynam, Dept Organism & Evolutionary Biol, Dept Math, Cambridge, MA 02138 USA
[2] Univ British Columbia, Dept Zool, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada
[3] Univ British Columbia, Dept Math, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada
关键词
evolution; cooperation; game theory; social dilemmas;
D O I
10.1016/j.jtbi.2005.08.040
中图分类号
Q [生物科学];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
The emergence and maintenance of cooperation by natural selection is an enduring conundrum in evolutionary biology, which has been studied using a variety of game theoretical models inspired by different biological situations. The most widely studied games are the Prisoner's Dilemma, the Snowdrift game and by-product mutualism for pairwise interactions, as well as Public Goods games in larger groups of interacting individuals. Here, we present a general framework for cooperation in social dilemmas in which all the traditional scenarios can be recovered as special cases. In social dilemmas, cooperators provide a benefit to the group at some cost, while defectors exploit the group by reaping the benefits without bearing the costs of cooperation. Using the concepts of discounting and synergy for describing how benefits accumulate when more than one cooperator is present in a group of interacting individuals, we recover the four basic scenarios of evolutionary dynamics given by (i) dominating defection, (ii) coexistence of defectors and cooperators, (iii) dominating cooperation and (iv) bi-stability, in which cooperators and defectors cannot invade each other. Generically, for groups of three or more interacting individuals further, more complex, dynamics can occur. Our framework provides the first unifying approach to model cooperation in different kinds of social dilemmas. (C) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:195 / 202
页数:8
相关论文
共 57 条
[1]  
Alexander R. D., 1987, BIOL MORAL SYSTEMS
[2]  
[Anonymous], PASSIONS REASON
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1998, Evol. Games Popul. Dyn., DOI DOI 10.1017/CBO9781139173179
[4]   THE EVOLUTION OF COOPERATION [J].
AXELROD, R ;
HAMILTON, WD .
SCIENCE, 1981, 211 (4489) :1390-1396
[5]   THE EVOLUTION OF RECIPROCITY IN SIZABLE GROUPS [J].
BOYD, R ;
RICHERSON, PJ .
JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL BIOLOGY, 1988, 132 (03) :337-356
[6]   COOPERATION - A BIOLOGISTS DILEMMA [J].
BROWN, JL .
ADVANCES IN THE STUDY OF BEHAVIOR, 1983, 13 :1-37
[7]   NOTE ON THE EVOLUTION OF ALTRUISM IN STRUCTURED DEMES [J].
CHARLESWORTH, B .
AMERICAN NATURALIST, 1979, 113 (04) :601-605
[8]   Behavioral ecology - Breeding together: Kin selection and mutualism in cooperative vertebrates [J].
Clutton-Brock, T .
SCIENCE, 2002, 296 (5565) :69-72
[9]   Partner preferences in by-product mutualisms and the case of predator inspection in fish [J].
Connor, RC .
ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR, 1996, 51 :451-454
[10]   ALTRUISM AMONG NON-RELATIVES - ALTERNATIVES TO THE PRISONERS-DILEMMA [J].
CONNOR, RC .
TRENDS IN ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION, 1995, 10 (02) :84-86