IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/thpobi/v136y2020icp31-40.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Kleptoparasitic interactions modeling varying owner and intruder hunger awareness

Author

Listed:
  • Chowdhury, Noble
  • Kentiba, Kirubel
  • Mirajkar, Yashwant
  • Nasseri, Mana
  • Rychtář, Jan
  • Taylor, Dewey

Abstract

We consider a game theoretical model of kleptoparasitic interaction between two individuals, the Owner and the Intruder. The Owner is in possession of a resource and must decide whether to defend the resource against the Intruder or flee. If the Owner defends, the Intruder must decide whether to fight with the Owner or flee. The outcome of the fight depends on the hunger of the individuals, the hungrier the individual is, the more likely they are to win the fight. We consider three scenarios: (a) both individuals know their own and their opponent’s hunger, (b) individuals only know their own hunger but not that of their opponent, and (c) individuals do not know their own nor the opponent’s hunger levels. We determine Nash equilibrium strategies in each scenario. We conclude that Owner is generally willing to defend more often than the Intruder is willing to attack. Also, the Intruder’s payoff is largest in the full information case; but the Owner may benefit in the no information or partial information cases when the cost of the fight is neither too large nor too small.

Suggested Citation

  • Chowdhury, Noble & Kentiba, Kirubel & Mirajkar, Yashwant & Nasseri, Mana & Rychtář, Jan & Taylor, Dewey, 2020. "Kleptoparasitic interactions modeling varying owner and intruder hunger awareness," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 31-40.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:thpobi:v:136:y:2020:i:c:p:31-40
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tpb.2020.11.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040580920300708
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tpb.2020.11.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alexandre V. Palaoro & Mark Briffa, 2017. "Weaponry and defenses in fighting animals: how allometry can alter predictions from contest theory," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 28(1), pages 328-336.
    2. Ross Cressman, 2003. "Evolutionary Dynamics and Extensive Form Games," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262033054, December.
    3. Varga, Tamás & Garay, József & Rychtář, Jan & Broom, Mark, 2020. "A temporal model of territorial defence with antagonistic interactions," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 15-35.
    4. M. Broom & G. D. Ruxton, 2003. "Evolutionarily stable kleptoparasitism: consequences of different prey types," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 14(1), pages 23-33, January.
    5. Fre´de´rique Dubois & Luc-Alain Giraldeau & James W. A. Grant, 2003. "Resource defense in a group-foraging context," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 14(1), pages 2-9, January.
    6. Argasinski, K. & Broom, M., 2013. "The nest site lottery: How selectively neutral density dependent growth suppression induces frequency dependent selection," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 82-90.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ozgur Aydogmus & Erkan Gürpinar, 2022. "Science, Technology and Institutional Change in Knowledge Production: An Evolutionary Game Theoretic Framework," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 1163-1188, December.
    2. Takuya Sekiguchi, 2023. "Fixation Probabilities of Strategies for Trimatrix Games and Their Applications to Triadic Conflict," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 1005-1033, September.
    3. Patrick Kane & Kevin J S Zollman, 2015. "An Evolutionary Comparison of the Handicap Principle and Hybrid Equilibrium Theories of Signaling," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-14, September.
    4. Zibo Xu, 2013. "The instability of backward induction in evolutionary dynamics," Discussion Paper Series dp633, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    5. Bezin, Emeline & Ponthière, Gregory, 2019. "The tragedy of the commons and socialization: Theory and policy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    6. Cressman, Ross & Hofbauer, Josef & Riedel, Frank, 2005. "Stability of the Replicator Equation for a Single-Species with a Multi-Dimensional Continuous Trait Space," Bonn Econ Discussion Papers 12/2005, University of Bonn, Bonn Graduate School of Economics (BGSE).
    7. Pawlowitsch, Christina, 2008. "Why evolution does not always lead to an optimal signaling system," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 203-226, May.
    8. Peña, Jorge & Nöldeke, Georg & Lehmann, Laurent, 2014. "Relatedness and synergies of kind and scale in the evolution of helping," Working papers 2014/09, Faculty of Business and Economics - University of Basel.
    9. Xinmiao An & Xiaomin Wang & Boyu Zhang, 2020. "Bimatrix Replicator Dynamics with Periodic Impulses," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 676-694, September.
    10. Josef Hofbauer & Simon M. Huttegger, 2015. "Selection-Mutation Dynamics of Signaling Games," Games, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-30, January.
    11. Bernergård, Axel & Mohlin, Erik, 2019. "Evolutionary selection against iteratively weakly dominated strategies," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 82-97.
    12. Dai Zusai, 2018. "Tempered best response dynamics," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 47(1), pages 1-34, March.
    13. Fabio Lamantia & Mario Pezzino, 2018. "The dynamic effects of fiscal reforms and tax competition on tax compliance and migration," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 672-690, August.
    14. Ennio Bilancini & Leonardo Boncinelli & Jiabin Wu, 2016. "The Interplay of Cultural Aversion and Assortativity for the Emergence of Cooperation," Center for Economic Research (RECent) 121, University of Modena and Reggio E., Dept. of Economics "Marco Biagi".
    15. Balkenborg, Dieter & Hofbauer, Josef & Kuzmics, Christoph, 2016. "Refined best reply correspondence and dynamics," Center for Mathematical Economics Working Papers 451, Center for Mathematical Economics, Bielefeld University.
    16. Jean Rabanal & Daniel Friedman, 2014. "Incomplete Information, Dynamic Stability and the Evolution of Preferences: Two Examples," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 4(4), pages 448-467, December.
    17. Dharini Hingu & K. S. Mallikarjuna Rao & A. J. Shaiju, 2020. "On superiority and weak stability of population states in evolutionary games," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 287(2), pages 751-760, April.
    18. Steffen Jørgensen, 2012. "Book Review: "Games and Dynamic Games" Edited by Alain Haurie, Jacek B. Krawczyk and Georges Zaccour," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(02), pages 1-3.
    19. Gregory Ponthiere, 2024. "Epictetusian rationality and evolutionary stability," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 647-673, July.
    20. Aradhana Narang & A. J. Shaiju, 2021. "Stability of faces in asymmetric evolutionary games," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 304(1), pages 343-359, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:thpobi:v:136:y:2020:i:c:p:31-40. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/intelligence .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.