|
|
|
Stochastic evolutionary public goods game with first and second order costly punishments in finite populations |
| Ji Quan(全吉)1, Yu-Qing Chu(储育青)2, Wei Liu(刘伟)3, Xian-Jia Wang(王先甲)4, Xiu-Kang Yang(阳修康)1 |
1 School of Management, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430070, China;
2 School of Science, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430070, China;
3 School of Resources and Environmental Engineering, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430070, China;
4 School of Economics and Management, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract We study the stochastic evolutionary public goods game with punishment in a finite size population. Two kinds of costly punishments are considered, i.e., first-order punishment in which only the defectors are punished, and second-order punishment in which both the defectors and the cooperators who do not punish the defective behaviors are punished. We focus on the stochastic stable equilibrium of the system. In the population, the evolutionary process of strategies is described as a finite state Markov process. The evolutionary equilibrium of the system and its stochastic stability are analyzed by the limit distribution of the Markov process. By numerical experiments, our findings are as follows. (i) The first-order costly punishment can change the evolutionary dynamics and equilibrium of the public goods game, and it can promote cooperation only when both the intensity of punishment and the return on investment parameters are large enough. (ii) Under the first-order punishment, the further imposition of the second-order punishment cannot change the evolutionary dynamics of the system dramatically, but can only change the probability of the system to select the equilibrium points in the “C+P” states, which refer to the co-existence states of cooperation and punishment. The second-order punishment has limited roles in promoting cooperation, except for some critical combinations of parameters. (iii) When the system chooses “C+P” states with probability one, the increase of the punishment probability under second-order punishment will further increase the proportion of the “P” strategy in the “C+P” states.
|
Received: 28 November 2017
Revised: 10 February 2018
Accepted manuscript online:
|
|
PACS:
|
02.50.Le
|
(Decision theory and game theory)
|
| |
02.50.Ga
|
(Markov processes)
|
| |
05.45.Pq
|
(Numerical simulations of chaotic systems)
|
| |
05.65.+b
|
(Self-organized systems)
|
|
| Fund: Project supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos.71501149 and 71231007),the Soft Science Project of Hubei Province,China (Grant No.2017ADC122),and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities,China (Grant No.WUT:2017VI070). |
Corresponding Authors:
Ji Quan, Yu-Qing Chu
E-mail: quanji123@163.com;chuyuqing@whut.edu.cn
|
Cite this article:
Ji Quan(全吉), Yu-Qing Chu(储育青), Wei Liu(刘伟), Xian-Jia Wang(王先甲), Xiu-Kang Yang(阳修康) Stochastic evolutionary public goods game with first and second order costly punishments in finite populations 2018 Chin. Phys. B 27 060203
|
| [1] |
Johnson D D P, Stopka P and Knights S 2003 Nature 421 911
|
| [2] |
Cox C A 2015 Econ. Lett. 126 63
|
| [3] |
Croson R, Fatas E and Neugebauer T 2005 Econ. Lett. 87 95
|
| [4] |
Heap S P H, Ramalingam A and Stoddard B V 2016 Econ. Lett. 146 4
|
| [5] |
Wagener A 2016 Econ. Lett. 138 34
|
| [6] |
Kosfeld M, Okada A and Riedl A 2009 Am. Econ. Rev. 99 1335
|
| [7] |
Skatova A and Ferguson E 2011 Pers. Individ. Dif. 51 237
|
| [8] |
Volk S, Thoeni C and Ruigrok W 2011 Pers. Individ. Dif. 50 810
|
| [9] |
Pfattheicher S, Keller J and Knezevic G 2017 Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 43 337
|
| [10] |
Abele S, Stasser G and Chartier C 2010 Personality and Social Psychology Review 14 385
|
| [11] |
Archetti M and Scheuring I 2012 J. Theor. Biol. 299 9
|
| [12] |
Hauert C 2010 J. Theor. Biol. 267 22
|
| [13] |
Sasaki T and Unemi T 2011 J. Theor. Biol. 287 109
|
| [14] |
Santos F C, Santos M D and Pacheco J M 2008 Nature 454 213
|
| [15] |
Bazzan A L C and Argenta V F 2012 Adv. Complex Syst. 15 1250027
|
| [16] |
The Anh H, Pereira L M and Lenaerts T 2017 Auton. Agent Multi Agent Syst. 31 561
|
| [17] |
Hauert C, Haiden N and Sigmund K 2004 Discrete Cont. Dyn.-B 4 575
|
| [18] |
Hauert C, De Monte S, Hofbauer J and Sigmund K 2002 Science 296 1129
|
| [19] |
Nikiforakis N 2010 Games Econ. Behav. 68 689
|
| [20] |
Brandt H, Hauert C and Sigmund K 2006 Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 103 495
|
| [21] |
Fowler J H 2005 Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 102 7047
|
| [22] |
Hauert C, Traulsen A, Brandt H, Nowak M A and Sigmund K 2007 Science 316 1905
|
| [23] |
Zhou Y, Jiao P and Zhang Q 2017 Appl. Econ. Lett. 24 54
|
| [24] |
Wang Z, Xu Z J, Huang J H and Zhang L Z 2010 Chin. Phys. B 19 010204
|
| [25] |
Wang Z, Xu Z J and Zhang L Z 2010 Chin. Phys. B 19 010201
|
| [26] |
Wang C, Wang L, Wang J, Sun S and Xia C 2017 Appl. Math. Comput. 293 18
|
| [27] |
Wang X, Chen X, Gao J and Wang L 2013 Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 56 181
|
| [28] |
Li A, Wu T, Cong R and Wang L 2013 Europhys. 103 30007
|
| [29] |
Chen M, Wang L, Sun S, Wang J and Xia C 2016 Phys. Lett. A 380 40
|
| [30] |
Sigmund K, Hauert C and Nowak M A 2001 Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98 10757
|
| [31] |
Brandt H, Hauert C and Sigmund K 2003 Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B 270 1099
|
| [32] |
Hauert C, Traulsen A, Brandt H, Nowak M A and Sigmund K 2008 Biol. Theory 3 114
|
| [33] |
Page T, Putterman L and Unel B 2005 Econ. J. 115 1032
|
| [34] |
Hong F and Lim W 2016 J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 126 102
|
| [35] |
Shinohara R 2009 Soc. Choice Welfare 32 367
|
| [36] |
Szabo G and Hauert C 2002 Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 118101
|
| [37] |
Cao X B, Du W B and Rong Z H 2010 Physica A 389 1273
|
| [38] |
Fan R, Zhang Y, Luo M and Zhang H 2017 Physica A 465 454
|
| [39] |
Liu R R, Jia C X and Wang B H 2010 Physica A 389 5719
|
| [40] |
Xia H J, Li P P, Ke J H and Lin Z Q 2015 Chin. Phys. B 24 040203
|
| [41] |
Yönaç M, Huang Z G, Wang S J, Xu X J and Wang Y H 2008 Europhys. 81 28001
|
| [42] |
Yönaç M, Menon R and Korolev K S 2015 Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 168102
|
| [43] |
Wang X P, Jiang L L and Wang B H 2012 Chin. Phys. B 21 070210
|
| [44] |
Chan S, Reid M D and Ficek Z 2012 Chin. Phys. B 21 018701
|
| [45] |
Quan J and Wang X J 2011 Chin. Phys. B 20 030203
|
| [46] |
Chaudhuri A 2011 Exper. Econ. 14 47
|
| [47] |
Interis M G and Haab T C 2014 J. Environ. Psychol. 38 271
|
| [48] |
Fehr E and Fischbacher U 2004 Evolution and Human Behavior 25 63
|
| [49] |
Forsyth P A I and Hauert C 2011 J. Math. Biol. 63 109
|
| [50] |
Foster D and Young P 1990 Theor. Popul. Biol. 38 219
|
| [51] |
Young P 1993 Econometrica 61 57
|
| [52] |
Quan J and Wang X J 2013 Commun. Theor. Phys. 60 37
|
| [53] |
Quan J, Liu W, Chu Y and Wang X 2017 Sci. Rep. 7 16110
|
| [54] |
Huang W, Hauert C and Traulsen A 2015 Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 112 9064
|
| [55] |
Liang H, Cao M and Wang X 2015 Syst. Control. Lett. 85 16
|
| [56] |
Amir M and Berninghaus S K 1996 Games Econ. Behav. 14 19
|
| [57] |
Stewart W J 1994 Introduction to the Numerical Solution of Markov Chains (Princeton:Princeton University Press)
|
| No Suggested Reading articles found! |
|
|
Viewed |
|
|
|
Full text
|
|
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
|
Cited |
|
|
|
|
Altmetric
|
|
blogs
Facebook pages
Wikipedia page
Google+ users
|
Online attention
Altmetric calculates a score based on the online attention an article receives. Each coloured thread in the circle represents a different type of online attention. The number in the centre is the Altmetric score. Social media and mainstream news media are the main sources that calculate the score. Reference managers such as Mendeley are also tracked but do not contribute to the score. Older articles often score higher because they have had more time to get noticed. To account for this, Altmetric has included the context data for other articles of a similar age.
View more on Altmetrics
|
|
|
