According to the public goods game (PGG) protocol, participants decide freely whether they want to contribute to a common pool or not, but the resulting benefit is distributed equally. A conceptually similar dilemma situation may emerge when participants consider if they claim a common resource but the related cost is covered equally by all group members. The latter establishes a reversed form of the original public goods game (R-PGG). In this work, we show that R-PGG is equivalent to PGG in several circumstances, starting from the traditional analysis, via the evolutionary approach in unstructured populations, to Monte Carlo simulations in structured populations. However, there are also cases when the behavior of R-PGG could be surprisingly different from the outcome of PGG. When the key parameters are heterogeneous, for instance, the results of PGG and R-PGG could be diverse even if we apply the same amplitudes of heterogeneity. We find that the heterogeneity in R-PGG generally impedes cooperation, while the opposite is observed for PGG. These diverse system reactions can be understood if we follow how payoff functions change when introducing heterogeneity in the parameter space. This analysis also reveals the distinct roles of cooperator and defector strategies in the mentioned games. Our observations may hopefully stimulate further research to check the potential differences between PGG and R-PGG due to the alternative complexity of conditions.
翻译:根据公共产品游戏(PGG)协议,参与者可以自由决定他们是否愿意为共同的集合作出贡献,但由此产生的利益可以平等分配。当参与者考虑是否要求共同资源,但相关费用由所有集团成员平等承担时,在概念上可能出现相似的两难局面。后者确立了原始公共产品游戏(R-PGG)的反向形式。在这项工作中,我们发现R-PGG在几种情况下等同于PGG,从传统分析开始,通过非结构化人群的渐进方法,到结构化人群的蒙特卡洛模拟。然而,也有这样的情况,即R-PGG的行为可能与PG的结果发生惊人的差别。例如,当关键参数各不相同时,PGG和R-PGG的结果可能各不相同,即使我们应用了同样的异质性。我们发现,R-PGG通常有异性,妨碍合作,而PGG则相反。如果我们在引入超异性功能时了解支付功能的变化情况,那么这些不同的系统反应是可以理解的。在引入PGGGGGG游戏的离差性研究中,我们提到的空间参数上的细微变点观察中,这种分析还可能显示我们不同的变变变变的变。