2019
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-32456-8_27
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Relationships Between Dilemma Strength and Fixation Properties in Coevolutionary Games

Abstract: Whether or not cooperation is favored over defection in evolutionary games can be assigned by structure coefficients for any arrangement of cooperators and defectors on any network modeled as a regular graph. We study how these structure coefficients relate to a scaling of dilemma strength in social dilemma games. It is shown that some graphs permit certain arrangements of cooperators and defectors to possess particularly large structure coefficients. Moreover, these large coefficients imply particularly large… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

1
0

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 19 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A generalization of these discussions can be achieved by the universal scaling approach for payoff matrices that facilitates studying a continuum of social dilemmas [34]. According to this approach a larger value of σ(π, G) implies a larger section of the parameter space spanned by gambleintending and risk-averting dilemma strength [29]. Based on this interpretation of the structure coefficient σ(π, G), we review the following major results of the numerical experiments presented in Sec.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A generalization of these discussions can be achieved by the universal scaling approach for payoff matrices that facilitates studying a continuum of social dilemmas [34]. According to this approach a larger value of σ(π, G) implies a larger section of the parameter space spanned by gambleintending and risk-averting dilemma strength [29]. Based on this interpretation of the structure coefficient σ(π, G), we review the following major results of the numerical experiments presented in Sec.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%