Skip to main content

Generalising Axelrod’s Metanorms Game Through the Use of Explicit Domain-Specific Norms

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Coordination, Organizations, Institutions, Norms, and Ethics for Governance of Multi-Agent Systems XVI (COINE 2023)

Abstract

Achieving social order in societies of self-interested autonomous agents is a difficult problem due to lack of trust in the actions of others and the temptation to seek rewards at the expense of others. In human society, social norms play a strong role in fostering cooperative behaviour—as long as the value of cooperation and the cost of defection are understood by a large proportion of society. Prior work has shown the importance of both norms and metanorms (requiring punishment of defection) to produce and maintain norm-compliant behaviour in a society, e.g. as in Axelrod’s approach of learning of individual behavioural characteristics of boldness and vengefulness. However, much of this work (including Axelrod’s) uses simplified simulation scenarios in which norms are implicit in the code or are represented as simple bit strings, which limits the practical application of these methods for agents that interact across a range of real-world scenarios with complex norms. This work presents a generalisation of Axelrod’s approach in which norms are explicitly represented and agents can choose their actions after performing what-if reasoning using a version of the event calculus that tracks the creation, fulfilment and violation of expectations. This approach allows agents to continually learn and apply their boldness and vengefulness parameters across multiple scenarios with differing norms. The approach is illustrated using Axelrod’s scenario as well as a social dilemma from the behavioural game theory literature.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Axelrod used five runs of a hundred generations to simulate the norms and metanorms games. However, we follow the recommendation of [7] and use 100 runs.

  2. 2.

    Axelrod does not state how he maintains a fixed population size after applying these reproduction rules. We follow the approach of [7] involving random sampling when the new population is too large, and random replication when the population is too small.

  3. 3.

    There is also an extended version of the \( exp \) fluent with these four arguments—the version used in this paper has only the residual expectation as its argument.

  4. 4.

    https://github.com/maxant/rules.

  5. 5.

    At present we assume there are no more than two relevant actions.

  6. 6.

    Populations with similar average levels of boldness and vengefulness are grouped together to create each vector. The end point of each arrow shows the average levels of these features one generation later [3].

  7. 7.

    We do not include a third-order norm for the plain-plateau scenario as this was not part of Klein’s model [10].

  8. 8.

    Run 1 of Experiment 2 ended with only one agent with a non-zero boldness value: 4/7.

References

  1. Alrawagfeh, W.: Norm representation and reasoning: a formalization in event calculus. In: International Conference on Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems, pp. 5–20. Springer (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Altrock, P.M., Traulsen, A.: Fixation times in evolutionary games under weak selection. New J. Phys. 11(1), 013012 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Axelrod, R.: An evolutionary approach to norms. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 80(4), 1095–1111 (1986)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bicchieri, C.: The Grammar of Society: The Nature and Dynamics of Social Norms. Cambridge University Press (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cranefield, S.: Agents and expectations. In: International Workshop on Coordination, Organizations, Institutions, and Norms in Agent Systems, pp. 234–255. Springer (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cranefield, S., Clark-Younger, H., Hay, G.: A collective action simulation platform. In: Multi-Agent-Based Simulation XX: 20th International Workshop, MABS 2019, Montreal, QC, Canada, May 13, 2019, Revised Selected Papers 20, pp. 69–80. Springer (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Galan, J.M., Izquierdo, L.R.: Appearances can be deceiving: Lessons learned re-implementing Axelrod’s evolutionary approach to norms. J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul. 8(3) (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hashmi, M., Governatori, G., Wynn, M.T.: Modeling obligations with event-calculus. In: Rules on the Web. From Theory to Applications: 8th International Symposium, RuleML 2014, Co-located with the 21st European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, ECAI 2014, Prague, Czech Republic, August 18–20, 2014, pp. 296–310. Springer (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Holzinger, K.: The problems of collective action: A new approach. MPI Collective Goods Preprint No. 2003/2, SSRN (2003). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.399140

  10. Klein, D.B.: The microfoundations of rules vs. discretion. Constit. Polit. Econ. 1(3), 1–19 (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Mueller, E.T.: Commonsense Reasoning. Morgan Kaufmann (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  12. North, M.J., Collier, N.T., Ozik, J., Tatara, E.R., Macal, C.M., Bragen, M., Sydelko, P.: Complex adaptive systems modeling with Repast Simphony. Complex Adapt. Syst. Model. 1(1), 3 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Sengupta, A., Cranefield, S., Pitt, J.: Solving social dilemmas by reasoning about expectations. In: Coordination, Organizations, Institutions, Norms, and Ethics for Governance of Multi-Agent Systems XIV, pp. 143–159. Springer (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Shanahan, M.: The event calculus explained. In: Artificial Intelligence Today, pp. 409–430. Springer (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Thøgersen, J.: Social norms and cooperation in real-life social dilemmas. J. Econ. Psychol. 29(4), 458–472 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Marsden Fund Council from New Zealand Government funding, managed by Royal Society Te Apārangi.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephen Cranefield .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Sengupta, A., Cranefield, S., Pitt, J. (2023). Generalising Axelrod’s Metanorms Game Through the Use of Explicit Domain-Specific Norms. In: Fornara, N., Cheriyan, J., Mertzani, A. (eds) Coordination, Organizations, Institutions, Norms, and Ethics for Governance of Multi-Agent Systems XVI. COINE 2023. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 14002. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-49133-7_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-49133-7_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-49132-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-49133-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics