What you gotta know to play good in the iterated prisoner's dilemma (Q1651791)

From MaRDI portal
Revision as of 20:03, 19 March 2024 by Openalex240319060354 (talk | contribs) (Set OpenAlex properties.)
scientific article
Language Label Description Also known as
English
What you gotta know to play good in the iterated prisoner's dilemma
scientific article

    Statements

    What you gotta know to play good in the iterated prisoner's dilemma (English)
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references
    10 July 2018
    0 references
    Summary: For the iterated prisoner's dilemma there exist good strategies which solve the problem when we restrict attention to the long term average payoff. When used by both players, these assure the cooperative payoff for each of them. Neither player can benefit by moving unilaterally to any other strategy, i.e., these provide Nash equilibria. In addition, if a player uses instead an alternative which decreases the opponent's payoff below the cooperative level, then his own payoff is decreased as well. Thus, if we limit attention to the long term payoff, these strategies effectively stabilize cooperative behavior. The existence of such strategies follows from the so-called folk theorem for supergames, and the proof constructs an explicit memory-one example, which has been labeled Grim. Here we describe all the memory-one good strategies for the non-symmetric version of the prisoner's dilemma. This is the natural object of study when the payoffs are in units of the separate players' utilities. We discuss the special advantages and problems associated with some specific good strategies.
    0 references
    prisoner's dilemma
    0 references
    stable cooperative behavior
    0 references
    iterated play
    0 references
    Markov strategies
    0 references
    good strategies
    0 references
    individual utility
    0 references

    Identifiers

    0 references
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references