Properties of winning Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma strategies.
Researchers have explored the performance of Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma strategies for decades, from the celebrated performance of Tit for Tat to the introduction of the zero-determinant strategies and the use of sophisticated learning structures such as neural networks. Many new strategies ha...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2024-12-01
|
| Series: | PLoS Computational Biology |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1012644 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850079895583981568 |
|---|---|
| author | Nikoleta E Glynatsi Vincent Knight Marc Harper |
| author_facet | Nikoleta E Glynatsi Vincent Knight Marc Harper |
| author_sort | Nikoleta E Glynatsi |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Researchers have explored the performance of Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma strategies for decades, from the celebrated performance of Tit for Tat to the introduction of the zero-determinant strategies and the use of sophisticated learning structures such as neural networks. Many new strategies have been introduced and tested in a variety of tournaments and population dynamics. Typical results in the literature, however, rely on performance against a small number of somewhat arbitrarily selected strategies, casting doubt on the generalizability of conclusions. In this work, we analyze a large collection of 195 strategies in thousands of computer tournaments, present the top performing strategies across multiple tournament types, and distill their salient features. The results show that there is not yet a single strategy that performs well in diverse Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma scenarios, nevertheless there are several properties that heavily influence the best performing strategies. This refines the properties described by Axelrod in light of recent and more diverse opponent populations to: be nice, be provocable and generous, be a little envious, be clever, and adapt to the environment. More precisely, we find that strategies perform best when their probability of cooperation matches the total tournament population's aggregate cooperation probabilities. The features of high performing strategies help cast some light on why strategies such as Tit For Tat performed historically well in tournaments and why zero-determinant strategies typically do not fare well in tournament settings. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-5c61505e656d4a7e8b2bf1b40a2654a1 |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 1553-734X 1553-7358 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2024-12-01 |
| publisher | Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
| record_format | Article |
| series | PLoS Computational Biology |
| spelling | doaj-art-5c61505e656d4a7e8b2bf1b40a2654a12025-08-20T02:45:06ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS Computational Biology1553-734X1553-73582024-12-012012e101264410.1371/journal.pcbi.1012644Properties of winning Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma strategies.Nikoleta E GlynatsiVincent KnightMarc HarperResearchers have explored the performance of Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma strategies for decades, from the celebrated performance of Tit for Tat to the introduction of the zero-determinant strategies and the use of sophisticated learning structures such as neural networks. Many new strategies have been introduced and tested in a variety of tournaments and population dynamics. Typical results in the literature, however, rely on performance against a small number of somewhat arbitrarily selected strategies, casting doubt on the generalizability of conclusions. In this work, we analyze a large collection of 195 strategies in thousands of computer tournaments, present the top performing strategies across multiple tournament types, and distill their salient features. The results show that there is not yet a single strategy that performs well in diverse Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma scenarios, nevertheless there are several properties that heavily influence the best performing strategies. This refines the properties described by Axelrod in light of recent and more diverse opponent populations to: be nice, be provocable and generous, be a little envious, be clever, and adapt to the environment. More precisely, we find that strategies perform best when their probability of cooperation matches the total tournament population's aggregate cooperation probabilities. The features of high performing strategies help cast some light on why strategies such as Tit For Tat performed historically well in tournaments and why zero-determinant strategies typically do not fare well in tournament settings.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1012644 |
| spellingShingle | Nikoleta E Glynatsi Vincent Knight Marc Harper Properties of winning Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma strategies. PLoS Computational Biology |
| title | Properties of winning Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma strategies. |
| title_full | Properties of winning Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma strategies. |
| title_fullStr | Properties of winning Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma strategies. |
| title_full_unstemmed | Properties of winning Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma strategies. |
| title_short | Properties of winning Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma strategies. |
| title_sort | properties of winning iterated prisoner s dilemma strategies |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1012644 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT nikoletaeglynatsi propertiesofwinningiteratedprisonersdilemmastrategies AT vincentknight propertiesofwinningiteratedprisonersdilemmastrategies AT marcharper propertiesofwinningiteratedprisonersdilemmastrategies |