Skip to main content
Log in

Learning to cooperate with Pavlov an adaptive strategy for the iterated Prisoner's Dilemma with noise

  • Published:
Theory and Decision Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Conflict of interest may be modeled, heuristically, by the iterated Prisoner's Dilemma game. Although several researchers have shown that the Tit-For-Tat strategy can encourage the evolution of cooperation, this strategy can never outscore any opponent and it does poorly against its clone in a noisy environment. Here we examine the family of Pavlovian strategies which adapts its play by positive and negative conditioning, much as many animals do. Mutual cooperation will evolve in a contest with Pavlov against a wide variety of opponents and in particular against its clone. And the strategy is quite stable in a noisy environment. Although this strategy cooperates and retaliates, as does Tit-For-Tat, it is not forgiving; Pavlov will exploit altruistic strategies until he is punished by mutual defection. Moreover, Pavlovian strategies are natural models for many real life conflict-of-interest encounters as well as human and computer simulations.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Axelrod, R.: 1984,The Evolution of Cooperation, New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Axelrod, R. and Dion, J.: 1987, ‘Annotated bibliography on the evolution of cooperation’, Institute of Public Policy Studies, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Axelrod, R. and Dion, J.: 1988, ‘The further evolution of cooperation’,Science 242, 1385–1390.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bendor, J., Kramer, R. M. and Stout, S.: 1991, ‘When in doubt ... Cooperation in a noisy Prisoner's Dilemma’,J. Conflict Resolution 35, 691–719.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bixenstine, V. W. and Gaebelin, J. W.: 1971, ‘Strategies of real opponents in eliciting cooperative choice in a prisoner's dilemma game’,J. Conflict Resolution 15, 157–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton, D.: 1989,Elementary Number Theory, 2nd. ed., Dubuque: W C Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conybeare, J.: 1987,Trade Wars, New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawkins, R.: 1989, The Selfish Gene, New Edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donninger, C.: 1986, ‘Is it always efficient to be nice?’ inParadoxical Effects of Social Behavior, A. Dickmann and P. Mitter (Eds.), Heidelberg: Physica Verlag, pp. 123–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kemeny, J. and Snell, J.: 1976,Finite Markov Chains, New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Komorita, S. S., Hilty, J. A. and Parks, C. D.: 1991, ‘Reciprocity and cooperation in social dilemmas’,J. Conflict Resolution 35, 494–518.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kraines, D. and Kraines, V.: 1989, (PPD) ‘Pavlov and the Prisoner's Dilemma’,Theory and Decision 26, 47–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lombardo, M.: 1985, ‘Mutual restraint in tree swallows’,Science 227, 1363–1365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macy, M.: 1989, ‘Walking out of social traps’,Rationality and Society 1, 197–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macy, M.: 1991 ‘Learning to cooperate: Stochastic and tacit collusion in social exchanges’,American J. Sociology 97, 808–843.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mailath, G. J.: ‘Introduction: Symposium on evolutionary game theory’,J. Economic Theory 57, 259–277.

  • May, R.: 1987, ‘More evolution of cooperation,’Nature 327, 15–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • MATLAB (386 version): 1991, The Math Works, Natick, MA.

  • Maynard Smith, J.: 1982,Evolution and the Theory of Games, Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Molander, P.: 1985, ‘The optimal level of generosity in a selfish uncertain environment’,J. Conflict Resolution 29, 611–618.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, U.: 1987, ‘Optimal retaliation and optimal cooperation’,J. Conflict Resolution 31, 692–724.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nowak, M. and Sigmund, K.: 1989, ‘Game-dynamical aspects of the Prisoner's Dilemma’,App. Math. and Comp. 30, 191–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nowak, M. and Sigmund, K.: 1990, ‘The evolution of stochastic strategies in the Prisoner's Dilemma’,Acta Applic. Math. 20, 247–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Opp, K-D.: 1988, ‘Spontaneous order and Tit for Tat’,J. Institutional and Theoretical Economics 144, 374–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orkin, M.: 1987, ‘Balanced strategies for Prisoner's Dilemma’,J. Conflict Resolution 31, 186–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patchen, M.: 1987, ‘Strategies for eliciting cooperation from an adversary’,J. Conflict Resolution 31, 164–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapoport, A. and Chammah, A. M.: 1965,Prisoner's Dilemma, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shubik, M.: 1970, ‘Game theory, behavior, and the paradox of the Prisoner's Dilemma’,J. Conflict Resolution 14, 181–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H.: 1991, ‘A mechanism for social selection and successful altruism’,Science 250, 1665–1668.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kraines, D., Kraines, V. Learning to cooperate with Pavlov an adaptive strategy for the iterated Prisoner's Dilemma with noise. Theor Decis 35, 107–150 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01074955

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01074955

Keywords

Navigation