The conflict between individual and collective interests is in the heart of every social dilemmas established by evolutionary game theory. We cannot avoid these conflicts but sometimes we may choose which interaction framework to use as a battlefield. For instance some people like to be part of a larger group while other persons prefer to interact in a more personalized, individual way. Both attitudes can be formulated via appropriately chosen traditional games. In particular, the prisoner's dilemma game is based on pair interaction while the public goods game represents multi-point interactions of group members. To reveal the possible advantage of a certain attitude we extend these models by allowing players not simply to change their strategies but also let them to vary their attitudes for a higher individual income. We show that both attitudes could be the winner at a specific parameter value. Interestingly, however, the subtle interplay between different states may result in a counterintuitive evolutionary outcome where the increase of the multiplication factor of public goods game drives the population to a fully defector state. We point out that the accompanying pattern formation can only be understood via the multipoint or multi-player interactions of different microscopic states where the vicinity of a particular state may influence the relation of two other competitors.
翻译:个人和集体利益之间的冲突是进化游戏理论所确定的每个社会困境的核心。 我们无法避免这些冲突,但有时我们可以选择哪些互动框架作为战场。 例如,有些人喜欢成为较大群体的一部分,而其他人则喜欢以更个性化的个人方式互动。 两种态度都可以通过适当选择的传统游戏形成。 特别是,囚犯的两难局面游戏是基于对等互动,而公益游戏代表了集团成员的多点互动。 为了揭示某种态度的可能好处,我们扩展了这些模式,允许参与者不仅改变策略,而且还允许他们改变对较高个人收入的态度。 我们表明,两种态度都可以在特定参数值上获胜。 但是,有趣的是,不同国家之间的微妙互动可能会导致反直觉的进化结果,因为公共商品游戏的倍增因素将人口推向完全叛逆状态。 我们指出,伴随的模式形成只能通过不同微科国家多点或多人互动来理解,在那里,特定国家的邻近地区可能会影响另外两个竞争者的关系。