IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jgames/v7y2016i3p19-d74905.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimal Decision Rules in Repeated Games Where Players Infer an Opponent’s Mind via Simplified Belief Calculation

Author

Listed:
  • Mitsuhiro Nakamura

    (Department of Evolutionary Studies of Biosystems, School of Advanced Sciences, SOKENDAI (The Graduate University for Advanced Studies), Hayama, Kanagawa 240-0193, Japan)

  • Hisashi Ohtsuki

    (Department of Evolutionary Studies of Biosystems, School of Advanced Sciences, SOKENDAI (The Graduate University for Advanced Studies), Hayama, Kanagawa 240-0193, Japan)

Abstract

In strategic situations, humans infer the state of mind of others, e.g., emotions or intentions, adapting their behavior appropriately. Nonetheless, evolutionary studies of cooperation typically focus only on reaction norms, e.g., tit for tat, whereby individuals make their next decisions by only considering the observed outcome rather than focusing on their opponent’s state of mind. In this paper, we analyze repeated two-player games in which players explicitly infer their opponent’s unobservable state of mind. Using Markov decision processes, we investigate optimal decision rules and their performance in cooperation. The state-of-mind inference requires Bayesian belief calculations, which is computationally intensive. We therefore study two models in which players simplify these belief calculations. In Model 1, players adopt a heuristic to approximately infer their opponent’s state of mind, whereas in Model 2, players use information regarding their opponent’s previous state of mind, obtained from external evidence, e.g., emotional signals. We show that players in both models reach almost optimal behavior through commitment-like decision rules by which players are committed to selecting the same action regardless of their opponent’s behavior. These commitment-like decision rules can enhance or reduce cooperation depending on the opponent’s strategy.

Suggested Citation

  • Mitsuhiro Nakamura & Hisashi Ohtsuki, 2016. "Optimal Decision Rules in Repeated Games Where Players Infer an Opponent’s Mind via Simplified Belief Calculation," Games, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-23, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jgames:v:7:y:2016:i:3:p:19-:d:74905
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/7/3/19/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/7/3/19/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James W. Friedman, 1971. "A Non-cooperative Equilibrium for Supergames," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 38(1), pages 1-12.
    2. Rand, David G. & Fudenberg, Drew & Dreber, Anna, 2015. "It's the thought that counts: The role of intentions in noisy repeated games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 481-499.
    3. Sergio Castellano, 2015. "Bayes’ rule and bias roles in the evolution of decision making," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 26(1), pages 282-292.
    4. Yuichi Yamamoto, 2014. "Stochastic Games with Hidden States, Second Version," PIER Working Paper Archive 15-019, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania, revised 01 Jun 2015.
    5. Yuichi Yamamoto, 2015. "Stochastic Games with Hidden States," PIER Working Paper Archive 15-007, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    6. Hisashi Ohtsuki & Yoh Iwasa & Martin A. Nowak, 2009. "Indirect reciprocity provides only a narrow margin of efficiency for costly punishment," Nature, Nature, vol. 457(7225), pages 79-82, January.
    7. Fudenberg, Drew & Maskin, Eric, 1990. "Evolution and Cooperation in Noisy Repeated Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(2), pages 274-279, May.
    8. Johannes Hörner & Takuo Sugaya & Satoru Takahashi & Nicolas Vieille, 2011. "Recursive Methods in Discounted Stochastic Games: An Algorithm for δ→ 1 and a Folk Theorem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 79(4), pages 1277-1318, July.
    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. Evans, Alecia & Sesmero, Juan, 2022. "Cooperation in Social Dilemmas with Correlated Noisy Payoffs: Theory and Experimental Evidence," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 322804, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Fudenberg, Drew & Ishii, Yuhta & Kominers, Scott Duke, 2014. "Delayed-response strategies in repeated games with observation lags," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 487-514.
    3. Drew Fudenberg & David G. Rand & Anna Dreber, 2012. "Slow to Anger and Fast to Forgive: Cooperation in an Uncertain World," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(2), pages 720-749, April.
    4. Kimmo Berg, 2016. "Elementary Subpaths in Discounted Stochastic Games," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 304-323, September.
    5. Evans, Alecia & Sesmero, Juan Pablo, 2022. "Noisy Payoffs in an Infinitely Repeated Prisoner’s Dilemma – Experimental Evidence," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322434, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Gallo, Edoardo & Riyanto, Yohanes E. & Roy, Nilanjan & Teh, Tat-How, 2019. "Cooperation in an Uncertain and Dynamic World," MPRA Paper 97878, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Edoardo Gallo & Yohanes E. Riyanto & Nilanjan Roy & Tat-How Teh, 2022. "Cooperation and punishment mechanisms in uncertain and dynamic networks," Papers 2203.04001, arXiv.org.
    8. Gallo, Edoardo & Riyanto, Yohanes E. & Roy, Nilanjan & Teh, Tat-How, 2022. "Cooperation and punishment mechanisms in uncertain and dynamic social networks," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 75-103.
    9. Zhang, Huanren, 2018. "Errors can increase cooperation in finite populations," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 203-219.
    10. Ueda, Masahiko, 2023. "Memory-two strategies forming symmetric mutual reinforcement learning equilibrium in repeated prisoners’ dilemma game," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 444(C).
    11. Matthijs van Veelen & Benjamin Allen & Moshe Hoffman & Burton Simon & Carl Veller, 2016. "Inclusive Fitness," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 16-055/I, Tinbergen Institute.
    12. Saral, Ali Seyhun, 2020. "Evolution of Conditional Cooperation in Prisoner's Dilemma," OSF Preprints wcpkz, Center for Open Science.
    13. Matthijs van Veelen, 2007. "Evolution of Strategies in Repeated Games with Discounting," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 06-115/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    14. Hilbe, Christian & Traulsen, Arne & Sigmund, Karl, 2015. "Partners or rivals? Strategies for the iterated prisoner's dilemma," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 41-52.
    15. P. Battiston & L. Chollete & S. Harrison, 2022. "May The Forcing Be With You: Experimental Evidence on Mandatory Contributions to Public Goods," Economics Department Working Papers 2022-EP01, Department of Economics, Parma University (Italy).
    16. Olivier GOSSNER, 2020. "The Robustness of Incomplete Penal Codes in Repeated Interactions," Working Papers 2020-29, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    17. Norman, Thomas W.L., 2018. "Inefficient stage Nash is not stable," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 275-293.
    18. Kaplow, Louis & Shapiro, Carl, 2007. "Antitrust," Handbook of Law and Economics, in: A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (ed.), Handbook of Law and Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 15, pages 1073-1225, Elsevier.
    19. Kessing, Sebastian G. & Konrad, Kai A. & Kotsogiannis, Christos, 2006. "Federal tax autonomy and the limits of cooperation," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 317-329, March.
    20. Motta, Massimo & Polo, Michele, 2003. "Leniency programs and cartel prosecution," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 347-379, March.

    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:gam:jgames:v:7:y:2016:i:3:p:19-:d:74905. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.