Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study continues an investigation into factors that can modify the emergence of cooperation in the iterated Prisoner's Dilemma. It is part of a project to construct agents that play the Prisoner's Dilemma in a manner similar to biological agents; in this study a representation called a binary decision automata is used. Binary decision automata are finite state machines that are given a selection of Boolean inputs that describe features of the game. Each state both specifies one of the variables and generates transitions and actions based on the value of the variable. The software permits the automata to see a subset of the possible decision variables and the decision variables made available have a strong impact on the way agents trained with an evolutionary algorithm behave. A collection of twenty-two game descriptors are used; six are based on recent information about past play, sixteen are features that are based on long-term information about play. The level of cooperation and other measures of behavior all vary strongly with the set of variables made available to the agent. In this study the level of cooperation is assessed at different evolutionary epochs to permit the evaluation of how cooperation emerges over time. It is found that the most importance variable for the emergence of cooperation was the variable that checks whether a player's opponent cooperated last time; an unexpected development is that the most used variable in evolved automata was one that checks to see if the automata is being exploited.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".