Skip to main content
Log in

Perceptron versus automaton in the finitely repeated prisoner’s dilemma

  • Published:
Theory and Decision Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We study the finitely repeated prisoner’s dilemma in which the players are restricted to choosing strategies which are implementable by a machine with a bound on its complexity. One player has to use a finite automaton while the other player has to use a finite perceptron. Some examples illustrate that the sets of strategies which are induced by these two types of machines are different and not ordered by set inclusion. Repeated game payoffs are evaluated according to the limit of means. The main result establishes that a cooperation at almost all stages of the game is an equilibrium outcome if the complexity of the machines the players may use is limited enough and if the length T of the repeated game is sufficiently large. This result persists when more than T states are allowed in the player’s automaton. We further consider a variant of the model in which the two players are restricted to choosing strategies which are implementable by perceptrons and prove that the players can cooperate at most of the stages provided that the complexity of their perceptrons is sufficiently reduced.

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

  • Abreu D., Rubinstein A. (1988) The structure of Nash equilibria in repeated games with finite automata. Econometrica 56: 1259–1281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aumann, R. J. (Ed.). (1981). Survey of repeated games. In Essays in game theory and mathematical economics in honour of Oskar Morgenstern. Manheim: Bibliographische Institut.

  • Axelrod R. (1984) The evolution of cooperation. Basic Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Benoît J.-P., Krishna V. (1987) Nash equilibria of finitely repeated games. International Journal of Game Theory 16: 197–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown N.R. (1997) Context memory and the selection of frequency estimation strategies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition 23: 898–914

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chatterjee K., Sabourian H. (2009) Game theory and strategic complexity. In: Meyers R.A. (ed) Encyclopedia of complexity and system science. Springer-Verlag, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Cho I.-K. (1994) Bounded rationality, neural network and folk theorem in repeated games with discounting. Economic Theory 4: 935–957

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho I.-K. (1995) Perceptrons play the repeated prisoner’s dilemma. Journal of Economic Theory 67: 267–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho I.-K. (1996a) On the complexity of repeated principal agent games. Economic Theory 7: 1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho I.-K. (1996b) Perceptrons play repeated games with imperfect monitoring. Games and Economic Behavior 16: 22–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho I.-K., Li H. (1999) How complex are networks playing repeated games. Economic Theory 13: 93–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devetag G., Warglien M. (2003) Games and phone numbers: Do short-term memory bounds affect strategic behavior. Journal of Economic Psychology 24: 189–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engle-Warnick J., Slonim R.L. (2006) Inferring repeated-game strategies from actions: Evidence from trust game experiments. Economic Theory 28: 603–632

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fudenberg D., Maskin E. (1986) The folk theorem in repeated games with discounting or with incomplete information. Econometrica 54: 533–556

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilboa I., Samet D. (1989) Bounded versus unbounded rationality: The tyranny of the weak. Games and Economic Behavior 1: 213–221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalai E. (1990) Bounded rationality and strategic complexity in repeated games. In: Neyman T., Ichiishi A., Tauman Y. (eds) Game theory and applications. Academic Press, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalai E., Stanford W. (1988) Finite rationality and interpersonal complexity in repeated games. Econometrica 56: 397–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neyman A. (1985) Bounded complexity justifies the cooperation in the finitely repeated prisoner’s dilemma. Economic Letters 19: 227–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neyman A. (1998) Finitely repeated games with finite automata. Mathematics of Operations Research 23: 513–552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neyman A., Okada D. (2000) Two-person repeated games with finite automata. International Journal of Game Theory 29: 309–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pandelaere M., Hoorens V. (2006) The effect of category focus at encoding on category frequency estimation strategies. Memory & Cognition 34: 28–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubinstein A. (1986) Finite automata play the repeated prisoner’s dilemma. Journal of Economic Theory 39: 83–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubinstein A. (1993) On price recognition and computational complexity in a monopolistic model. Journal of Political Economy 101: 473–484

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon H.A. (1959) Theories of decision-making in economics and behavioral science. American Economic Review 49: 253–283

    Google Scholar 

  • Weisbuch G. (1990) Complex systems dynamics. Addison-Wesley: Redwood City, CA, USA

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sylvain Béal.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Béal, S. Perceptron versus automaton in the finitely repeated prisoner’s dilemma. Theory Decis 69, 183–204 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-009-9158-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-009-9158-y

Keywords

Navigation