4.6 Article

Determinants of public cooperation in multiplex networks

期刊

NEW JOURNAL OF PHYSICS
卷 19, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.1088/1367-2630/aa6ea1

关键词

public goods game; public cooperation; evolutionary game theory; multiplex networks; multilayer networks

资金

  1. EPSRC [EP/N013492/1]
  2. Slovenian Research Agency [J1-7009, P5-0027]
  3. EPSRC [EP/N013492/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  4. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/N013492/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Synergies between evolutionary game theory and statistical physics have significantly improved our understanding of public cooperation in structured populations. Multiplex networks, in particular, provide the theoretical framework within network science that allows us to mathematically describe the rich structure of interactions characterizing human societies. While research has shown that multiplex networks may enhance the resilience of cooperation, the interplay between the overlap in the structure of the layers and the control parameters of the corresponding games has not yet been investigated. With this aim, we consider here the public goods game on a multiplex network, and we unveil the role of the number of layers and the overlap of links, as well as the impact of different synergy factors in different layers, on the onset of cooperation. We show that enhanced public cooperation emerges only when a significant edge overlap is combined with at least one layer being able to sustain some cooperation by means of a sufficiently high synergy factor. In the absence of either of these conditions, the evolution of cooperation in multiplex networks is determined by the bounds of traditional network reciprocity with no enhanced resilience. These results caution against overly optimistic predictions that the presence of multiple social domains may in itself promote cooperation, and they help us better understand the complexity behind prosocial behavior in layered social systems.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据