The basic social dilemma is frequently captured by a public goods game where participants decide simultaneously whether to support a common pool or not and after the enhanced contributions are distributed uniformly among all competitors. What if the result of common efforts is {\it not} distributed immediately, but it is reinvested and added to the pool for a next round? This extension may not only result in an enhanced benefit for group members but also opens new strategies for involved players because they may act in distinct rounds differently. In this work we focus on the simplest case when two rounds are considered, but the applied multiplication factors dedicated to a certain round can be different. We show that in structured populations the winning strategy may depend sensitively on the ratio of these factors and the last round has a special importance to reach a fully cooperative state. We also observe that it may pay for defectors to support the first round and after enjoy the extra benefit of accumulated contributions. Full cooperator strategy is only viable if the second round ensures a premium benefit of investments.
翻译:基本社会困境往往被一种公益游戏所抓住,在这个游戏中,参与者同时决定是否支持一个共同的集合,在增加的缴款在所有竞争者之间统一分配之后。如果共同努力的结果不是立即分布,而是重新投资并加入到集合中进行下一轮?这种扩大不仅可能给集团成员带来更大的好处,而且为参与的参与者打开新的战略,因为他们可能采取不同的回合行动。在这项工作中,当两轮审议时,我们侧重于最简单的案例,但用于某一回合的应用乘数因素可能有所不同。我们表明,在结构化人群中,获胜战略可能敏感地取决于这些因素的比例,而上一轮战略对于达到一个充分合作的国家具有特别重要的意义。我们还注意到,它可能为叛逃者支付支持第一轮并享受累积捐款的额外好处。只有在第二轮确保投资的溢价利益时,全面合作者战略才可行。