Previous studies suggest that cooperation prevails when individuals can switch their interaction partners quickly. However, it is still unclear how quickly individuals should switch adverse partners to maximize cooperation. To address this issue, we propose a simple model of coevolutionary prisoner's dilemma in which individuals are allowed to either adjust their strategies or switch their defective partners. Interestingly, we find that, depending on the game parameter, there is an optimal tendency of switching adverse partnerships that maximizes the fraction of cooperators in the population. We confirm that the stabilization of cooperation by partner switching remains effective under some situations, where either normalized or accumulated payoff is used in strategy updating, and where either only cooperators or all individuals are privileged to sever disadvantageous partners. We also provide an extended pair approximation to study the coevolutionary dynamics. Our results may be helpful in understanding the role of partner switching in the stabilization of cooperation in the real world.

Social exclusion, keeping free riders from benefit sharing, plays an important role in sustaining cooperation in our world. Here we propose two different exclusion regimes, namely, peer exclusion and pool exclusion, to investigate the evolution of social exclusion in finite populations. In the peer exclusion regime, each excluder expels all the defectors independently, and thus bears the total cost on his own, while in the pool exclusion regime, excluders spontaneously form an institution to carry out rejection of the free riders, and each excluder shares the cost equally. In a public goods game containing only excluders and defectors, it is found that peer excluders outperform pool excluders if the exclusion costs are small, and the situation is converse once the exclusion costs exceed some critical points, which holds true for all the selection intensities and different update rules. Moreover, excluders can dominate the whole population under a suitable parameters range in the presence of second-order free riders (cooperators), showing that exclusion has prominent advantages over common costly punishment. More importantly, our finding indicates that the group exclusion mechanism helps the cooperative union to survive under unfavorable conditions. Our results may give some insights into better understanding the prevalence of such a strategy in the real world and its significance in sustaining cooperation.

In real situations, people are often faced with the option of voluntary contribution to achieve a collective goal, for example, building a dam or a fence, in order to avoid an unfavorable loss. Those who do not donate, however, can free ride on others' sacrifices. As a result, cooperation is difficult to maintain, leading to an enduring collective-risk social dilemma. To address this issue, here we propose a simple yet effective theoretical model of threshold public goods game with collective risk and focus on the effect of risk on the emergence of social cooperation. To do this, we consider the population dynamics represented by replicator equation for two simplifying scenarios, respectively: one with fair sharers, who contribute the minimum average amount versus defectors and the other with altruists contributing more than average versus defectors. For both cases, we find that the dilemma is relieved in high-risk situations where cooperation is likely to persist and dominate defection in the population. Large initial endowment to individuals also encourages the risk-averse action, which means that, as compared to poor players (with small initial endowment), wealthy individuals (with large initial endowment) are more likely to cooperate in order to protect their private accounts. In addition, we show that small donation amount and small threshold (collective target) can encourage and sustain cooperation. Furthermore, for other parameters fixed, the impacts of group size act differently on the two scenarios because of distinct mechanisms: in the former case where the cost of cooperation depends on the group size, large size of group readily results in defection, while easily maintains cooperation in the latter case where the cost of cooperation is fixed irrespective of the group size. Our theoretical results of the replicator dynamics are in excellent agreement with the individual based simulation results.

Previous studies of games on dynamic graphs have almost specified pairwise interactions using the prisoner's dilemma game. We instead here for the first time explore coevolutionary dynamics in the context of interactions being characterized by the public goods game. Individuals are endowed with the capacity to adjust both their strategy and their social ties, occurring exclusively dependent on their payoffs. Under strategy updating, focal individuals are more likely to imitate their neighbors performing better. Meanwhile, they would abstain from engaging in the most defective neighborhoods if the opportunities of adjusting social ties arise, representing trait of individuals that they prefer better but exclude nasty environments. How often strategy dynamics and adaptation of social ties separately progress is governed by a tunable parameter. We experimentally found that opportune tradeoff of these two dynamics peaks cooperation, an observation absent whenever either dynamics is considered. We confirm that the stabilization of cooperation resulting from the partner switching remains effective under some more realistic situation where the maximal number of social ties one can admit is restrained.

Most of previous studies concerning the Public Goods Game assume either participation is unconditional or the number of actual participants in a competitive group changes over time. How the fixed group size, prescribed by social institutions, affects the evolution of cooperation is still unclear. We propose a model where individuals with heterogeneous social ties might well engage in differing numbers of Public Goods Games, yet with each Public Goods Game being constant size during the course of evolution. To do this, we assume that each focal individual unidirectionally selects a constant number of interaction partners from his immediate neighbors with probabilities proportional to the degrees or the reputations of these neighbors, corresponding to degree-based partner selection or reputation-based partner selection, respectively. Because of the stochasticity the group formation is dynamical. In both selection regimes, monotonical dependence of the stationary density of cooperators on the group size was found, the former over the whole range but the latter over a restricted range of the renormalized enhancement factor. Moreover, the reputation-based regime can substantially improve cooperation. To interpret these differences, the microscopic characteristics of individuals are probed. We later extend the degree-based partner selection to general cases where focal individuals have preferences towards their neighbors of varying social ties to form groups. As a comparison, we as well investigate the situation where individuals locating on the degree regular graphs choose their co-players at random. Our results may give some insights into better understanding the widespread teamwork and cooperation in the real world.