Artificial Life and Robotics

, 14:429 | Cite as

Using the spatial dilemma strategies to model agents’ commitments for a coalition formation

  • D. Thien Nguyen
  • Yuji Katsumata
  • Masahiro Tokumitsu
  • Yoshiteru Ishida
Original Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

In spatial strategies of a spatial prisoner’s dilemma (Ishida and Mori (2005) Artif Life Robotics 9:139–143), it is possible to involve not only the geographical configuration of countries, but also many other relations such as economic relations, historical relations, military relations, and so on if they can be expressed by a network. This article explores the possibility of modeling an agent’s commitments using spatial strategies. Several types of spatiotemporal strategy are discussed in a context of coalition formation in international communities.

Key words

Spatial prisoner’s dilemma Spatial strategy International politics Coalition formation 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    Imai H (2008) Game analysis of Kyoto and post-Kyoto schemes. Global Conference on Global Warming 2008, Turkey, KA-8Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wulfert E, Dougher MJ, Greenway DE (1991) Protocol analysis of the correspondence of verbal behavior and equivalence class formation. J Exp Anal Behav 56(3):489–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nowak MA, May RM (1992) Evolutionary games and spatial chaos. Nature 359:826–829CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nowak MA, May RM (1993) The spatial dilemmas of evolution. J Bifurc Chaos 3:35–78MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ishida Y, Mori T (2005) Spatial strategies in a generalized spatial prisoner’s dilemma. Artif Life Robotics 9:139–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Katsumata Y, Ishida Y (2008) On a membrane formation in a spatio-temporally generalized prisoner’s dilemma. ACRI 5191: 60–66Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Imhofa LA, Fudenbergb D, Nowak MA (2007) Tit-for-tat or win-stay, lose-shift? J Theor Biol 247:574–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Grubb M, Vrolijk C, Brack D (1999) The Kyoto Protocol: a guide and assessment. Royal Institute of International AffairsGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Konstantinidis N, Hall R (2007) Gradualism and uncertainty in international union formation. The International Platform of Ludwig Maximilian University’s Center for Economic Studies and the IFO Institute for Economic ResearchGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lindgren K, Moore C, Nordahl M (1998) Complexity of twodimensional patterns. J Stat Phys 91(5–6):909–951MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Symposium on Artificial Life and Robotics (ISAROB). 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. Thien Nguyen
    • 1
  • Yuji Katsumata
    • 1
  • Masahiro Tokumitsu
    • 1
  • Yoshiteru Ishida
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Knowledge-Based Information EngineeringToyohashi University of TechnologyTempaku, Toyohashi, AichiJapan

Personalised recommendations