Cooperation driven by success-driven group formation

Adversity and cooperation in heterogeneous pairs

This paper provides a game-theoretic model of the effect of higher adversity on the evolution of cooperation. The focus lies on how this effect of higher adversity is impacted when there is transient, non-genetic heterogeneity in the form of differences in the players' capabilities of contributing to the public good, in the benefits they obtain from the public good, or in their cooperation costs. A framework is provided that identifies the common mechanisms that are at work across two models of cooperation (jointly producing a public good, and jointly defending an existing public good), and across the mentioned types of heterogeneity. With relatively small heterogeneity, higher adversity generates a common-enemy effect for large cooperation costs and a deterrence effect for small cooperation costs. Yet, these results on the effect of higher adversity are completely reversed for relatively large heterogeneity.

Synergistic third-party rewarding and punishment in the public goods game

We study the evolution of cooperation in the spatial public goods game in the presence of third-party rewarding and punishment. The third party executes public intervention, punishing groups where cooperation is weak and rewarding groups where cooperation is strong. We consider four different scenarios to determine what works best for cooperation, in particular, neither rewarding nor punishment, only rewarding, only punishment or both rewarding and punishment. We observe strong synergistic effects when rewarding and punishment are simultaneously applied, which are absent if neither of the two incentives or just each individual incentive is applied by the third party. We find that public cooperation can be sustained at comparatively low third-party costs under adverse conditions, which is impossible if just positive or negative incentives are applied. We also examine the impact of defection tolerance and application frequency, showing that the higher the tolerance and the frequency of rewarding and punishment, the more cooperation thrives. Phase diagrams and characteristic spatial distributions of strategies are presented to corroborate these results, which will hopefully prove useful for more efficient public policies in support of cooperation in social dilemmas.

Phenotype affinity mediated interactions can facilitate the evolution of cooperation

We study the coevolutionary dynamics of the diversity of phenotype and the evolution of cooperation in the Prisoner's Dilemma. Rather than pre-assigning zero-or-one interaction rate, we diversify the rate of interaction by associating it with phenotypes. Individuals each carry a set of potentially expressible traits and expresses a number of such traits at a cost proportional to the number. The set of traits expressed constitutes phenotype. Phenotypes and thus the rate of interaction are evolvable over time. Our results show that nonnegligible cost of expressing traits restrains phenotype diversity, and the evolutionary race mainly proceeds on between cooperative strains and defective strains who express a very few traits. It pays for cooperative strains to express a very few traits. Though such a low level of expression weakens reciprocity between cooperative strains, it decelerates the rate of interaction between cooperative strains and defective strains to a larger degree, leading to the predominance of cooperative strains over defective strains. We also find that evolved diversity of phenotype can occasionally destabilize due to the invasion of defective mutants, implying that cooperation and diversity of phenotype can mutually reinforce each other. Our results may help better understand the coevolution of cooperation and the diversity of phenotype.

Knowing the past improves cooperation in the future

Cooperation is the cornerstone of human evolutionary success. Like no other species, we champion the sacrifice of personal benefits for the common good, and we work together to achieve what we are unable to achieve alone. Knowledge and information from past generations is thereby often instrumental in ensuring we keep cooperating rather than deteriorating to less productive ways of coexistence. Here we present a mathematical model based on evolutionary game theory that shows how using the past as the benchmark for evolutionary success, rather than just current performance, significantly improves cooperation in the future. Interestingly, the details of just how the past is taken into account play only second-order importance, whether it be a weighted average of past payoffs or just a single payoff value from the past. Cooperation is promoted because information from the past disables fast invasions of defectors, thus enhancing the long-term benefits of cooperative behavior.

An optimal strategy to solve the Prisoner's Dilemma

Cooperation is a central mechanism for evolution. It consists of an individual paying a cost in order to benefit another individual. However, natural selection describes individuals as being selfish and in competition among themselves. Therefore explaining the origin of cooperation within the context of natural selection is a problem that has been puzzling researchers for a long time. In the paradigmatic case of the Prisoner's Dilemma (PD), several schemes for the evolution of cooperation have been proposed. Here we introduce an extension of the Replicator Equation (RE), called the Optimal Replicator Equation (ORE), motivated by the fact that evolution acts not only at the level of individuals of a population, but also among competing populations, and we show that this new model for natural selection directly leads to a simple and natural rule for the emergence of cooperation in the most basic version of the PD. Contrary to common belief, our results reveal that cooperation can emerge among selfish individuals because of selfishness itself: if the final reward for being part of a society is sufficiently appealing, players spontaneously decide to cooperate.

Competing opinion diffusion on social networks

Opinion competition is a common phenomenon in real life, such as with opinions on controversial issues or political candidates; however, modelling this competition remains largely unexplored. To bridge this gap, we propose a model of competing opinion diffusion on social networks taking into account degree-dependent fitness or persuasiveness. We study the combined influence of social networks, individual fitnesses and attributes, as well as mass media on people's opinions, and find that both social networks and mass media act as amplifiers in opinion diffusion, the amplifying effect of which can be quantitatively characterized. We analytically obtain the probability that each opinion will ultimately pervade the whole society when there are no committed people in networks, and the final proportion of each opinion at the steady state when there are committed people in networks. The results of numerical simulations show good agreement with those obtained through an analytical approach. This study provides insight into the collective influence of individual attributes, local social networks and global media on opinion diffusion, and contributes to a comprehensive understanding of competing diffusion behaviours in the real world.

The Beneficial Role of Mobility for the Emergence of Innovation

Innovation is a key ingredient for the evolution of several systems, including social and biological ones. Focused investigations and lateral thinking may lead to innovation, as well as serendipity and other random discovery processes. Some individuals are talented at proposing innovation (say innovators), while others at deeply exploring proposed novelties, at getting further insights on a theory, or at developing products, services, and so on (say developers). This separation in terms of innovators and developers raises an issue of paramount importance: under which conditions a system is able to maintain innovators? According to a simple model, this work investigates the evolutionary dynamics that characterize the emergence of innovation. In particular, we consider a population of innovators and developers, in which agents form small groups whose composition is crucial for their payoff. The latter depends on the heterogeneity of the formed groups, on the amount of innovators they include, and on an award-factor that represents the policy of the system for promoting innovation. Under the hypothesis that a "mobility" effect may support the emergence of innovation, we compare the equilibria reached by our population in different cases. Results confirm the beneficial role of "mobility", and the emergence of further interesting phenomena.