MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402044589 · doi:10.1186/s12862-024-02302-6

Game theory elucidates how competitive dynamics mediate animal social networks

2024· article· en· W4402044589 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Ecology and Evolution · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGame theoryDynamics (music)Cognitive scienceEconomicsSociologyMathematical economicsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: While most game theoretical models assume that individuals randomly interact with all other group members, strong evidence indicates that individuals tend to preferentially interact with some of them. The position of an individual in a network affects, among other factors related to survival, its predation risk and competitive success. Here I then modified the Hawk-Dove game to explore the effect of social network structure on competitive strategy of individuals that differ in their fighting ability and may adjust their use of the Hawk, Dove and Assessor tactics to maximize their foraging success when they meet opponents they are connected with. RESULTS: From randomly generated networks, I demonstrate that phenotypic assortment by fighting ability reduces individuals' aggressiveness and, as such, favours cooperative interactions. Furthermore, the success of individuals with the weakest fighting ability is usually highest within networks where they most frequently meet opponents with the same fighting ability as their own, suggesting they might benefit from breaking connections with strong contestants. This might be the case when strong contestants systematically rely on the aggressive Hawk tactic or the risk of being predated is low and independent of the number of neighbours. Thus, I extended the model and built a dynamic model to allow individuals not only to adjust their behaviour to local conditions but also to modify the structure of the social network. The number of connections and degree of phenotypic assortment are then affected by ecological factors (e.g. resources value and predation risk), but above all by whether individuals can reliably assess the competitive ability of their opponents and adjust their behaviour accordingly. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide strong evidence that behaviour can play a key role in shaping network structure and highlight the importance of considering the coevolution of network and behaviour to apprehend its consequences on population dynamics.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.644
Threshold uncertainty score0.658

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it