Understanding and maximizing the effects of heterogeneous investment, particularly in a socially diverse society, on the evolution of cooperation have been the focus of recent research. In the most existing studies, individuals are limited to make binary decisions (i.e., either cooperate or defect). This is unrealistic in many real-world situations. In this paper, we investigate the effect of a heterogeneous investment on the evolution of cooperation in mixed strategy public goods games, wherein individuals have different probability of cooperation. Specifically, players are able to distribute heterogeneous investments into different groups, and they tend to allocate their investment into the group which achieves a higher return on investment (e.g., payoffs). Simulation results show that the formation of cooperative clusters allows cooperative players to resist the exploitation of defective players; subsequently, the cooperation level of the whole population significantly increases. Moreover, the results also show that cooperative clusters become more robust when the investment redistribution decision relies on more recent information. Our study may offer new insights into how strategy diversity promotes the evolutionary of cooperation in realistic situations.
Spatial public goods game Mixed strategy Heterogeneous investment
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Authors like to appreciate the anonymous referees for their valuable comments and suggestions. This work is supported by the National Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 61100194, 61402141, 61100039, 61272173 and 61403059) and the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province (Grant No. BK20131277).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Bo X, Wang J, Ruipu D (2014) Relational diversity promotes cooperation in prisoner’s dilemma games. PLoS ONE 9:e114464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandt H, Hauert C, Sigmund K (2003) Punishment and reputation in spatial public goods games. Biol Sci 270:1099–1104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cao XB, Du WB, Rong ZH (2010) The evolutionary public goods game on scale-free networks with heterogeneous investment. Phys A Stat Mech Appl 389:1273–1280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen X, Liu Y, Zhou Y (2012) Adaptive and bounded investment returns promote cooperation in spatial public goods games. PLoS ONE 7:e36895CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fu Z, Ren K, Shu J, Sun X, Huang F (2015) Enabling personalized search over encrypted outsourced data with efficiency improvement. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 27(9):2546–2559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fu Z, Sun X, Liu Q, Zhou L, Shu J (2015) Achieving efficient cloud search services: multi-keyword ranked search over encrypted cloud data supporting parallel computing. IEICE Trans Commun 98(1):190–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gao J, Li Z, Wu T (2007) Diversity of contribution promotes cooperation in public goods games. Phys A Stat Mech Appl 389:3166–3171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross T (2010) Towards a new human-centred computing methodology for cooperative ambient intelligence. J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput 1(1):31–42MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hauert C, Monte S, Hofbauer J (2002) Volunteering as red queen mechanism for cooperation in public goods games. Science 296:1129–1132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang K, Wang T, Cheng Y (2015) Effect of heterogeneous investments on the evolution of cooperation in spatial public goods game. PLoS ONE 10:e0120317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiang W, Wang G, Zakirul Alam Bhuiyan Md, Wu J (2016) Understanding graph-based trust evaluation in online social networks: methodologies and challenges. ACM Comput Surv 49(1):10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Killingback T, Doebeli M, Hauert C (2010) Diversity of cooperation in the tragedy of the commons. Biol Theory 1:243–253Google Scholar
Kohei M, Tanimoto J, Aya H (2013) Influence of stochastic perturbation of both action updating and strategy updating in mixed-strategy 2\(\times \)2 games on evolution of cooperation. Phys Rev E 88:062149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kokubo S, Wang Z, Tanimoto J (2015) Spatial reciprocity for discrete, continuous and mixed strategy setups. Appl Math Comput 259:552–568MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Lei C, Wu T, Jia JY (2010) Heterogeneity of allocation promotes cooperation in public goods games. Phys A Stat Mech Appl 389:4708–4714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liang X, Xiao Y (2014) A survey of biological collaboration models. J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput 5(4):551C563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ma T, Zhou J, Tang M, Tian Y, Al-Dhelaan A, Al-Rodhaan M, Lee S (2015) Social network and tag sources based augmenting collaborative recommender system. IEICE Trans Inform Syst E98–D(4):902–910CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szolonki A, Perc M (2012) Evolutionary advantages of adaptive rewarding. New J Phys 14:93016–93029CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szolonki A, Perc M (2012) Conditional strategies and the evolution of cooperation in spatial public goods games. Phys Rev E 85:287–300Google Scholar
Szolonki A, Perc M, Szab G (2009) Topology independent impact of noise on cooperation in spatial public goods games. Phys Rev E 80:2142–2152Google Scholar
Szolonki A, Szab G, Perc M (2011) Phase diagrams for the spatial public goods game with pool punishment. Phys Rev E 83:856–875Google Scholar
Szolonki A, Wang Z, Perc M (2012) Wisdom of groups promotes cooperation in evolutionary social dilemmas. Sci Rep 2:576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanimoto J (2015) Correlated asynchronous behavior updating with a mixed strategy system in spatial prisoner’s dilemma games enhances cooperation. Chaos Soliton Fract 80:39–46MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
Teng X, Yan S, Tang S (2014) Individual behavior and social wealth in the spatial public goods game. Phys A Stat Mech Appl 402:141–149MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar