Change Your Tags Fast! – A Necessary Condition for Cooperation?

  • David Hales
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3415)


Several tag models with intriguing properties have been advanced recently. But currently there is little detailed understanding of the underlying processes. Specifically it is not know what (if any) are the necessary conditions for tag systems to produce high levels of cooperation. We identify, for the first time, what appears to be a necessary condition that previous tag models implicitly contained. It appears that, in general, for tag-based systems to support high levels of cooperation tags must mutate faster than strategies because cooperative tag groups need to spread (by mutation of tags) before free riders (by mutation on strategies) invade the group. We test this theory with simulation.


Mutation Rate Selfish Node Mutation Factor High Cooperation Prisoner Dilemma 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Davis, L.: Handbook of Genetic Algorithms. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York (1991)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Edmonds, B., Hales, D.: Replication, Replication and Replication - Some Hard Lessons from Model Alignment. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 6(4) (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hales, D.: Cooperation without Space or Memory: Tags, Groups and the Prisoner’s Dilemma. In: Moss, S., Davidsson, P. (eds.) MABS 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1979, pp. 157–166. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hales, D.: Tag Based Cooperation in Artificial Societies. PhD Thesis, Dept. of Computer Science, University of Essex, U.K. (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hales, D.: Evolving Specialisation, Altruism and Group-Level Optimisation Using Tags. In: Sichman, J.S., Bousquet, F., Davidsson, P. (eds.) MABS 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2581, pp. 26–35. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hales, D., Edmonds, B.: Evolving Social Rationality for MAS using ”Tags”. In: Rosenschein, J.S., et al. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS2003), Melbourne, pp. 497–503. ACM Press, New York (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hales, D., Edmonds, B.: Can Tags Build Working Systems? - From MABS to ESOA. In: Di Marzo Serugendo, G., Karageorgos, A., Rana, O.F., Zambonelli, F. (eds.) ESOA 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2977. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hales, D.: Self-Organizing, Open and Cooperative P2P Societies – From Tags to Networks. Presented at the 2nd Workshop on Engineering Self-Organizing Applications (ESOA) at AAMAS 2004, New York (July 2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hales, D.: From Selfish Nodes to Cooperative Networks - Emergent Link-based Incentives in Peer-to-Peer Networks. In: Proceedings of the Fourth IEEE International Conference on Peer-to-Peer Computing (p2p2004), Zurich, Switzerland, August 25-27. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos (2004c)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hamilton, W.D.: The genetical evolution of social behaviours, I and II. J. Theor. Biol. 7, 1–52 (1964)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Holland, J.: The Effect of Lables (Tags) on Social Interactions. Santa Fe Institute Working Paper 93-10-064. Santa Fe, NM (1993)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jelasity, M., Montresor, A., Babaoglu, O.: A modular paradigm for building selforganizing peer-to-peer applications. In: Di Marzo Serugendo, G., Karageorgos, A., Rana, O.F., Zambonelli, F. (eds.) ESOA 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2977. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kalenka, S., Jennings, N.R.: Socially Responsible Decision Making by Autonomous Agents. In: Korta, K., Sosa, E., Arrazola, X. (eds.) Cognition, Agency and Rationality, pp. 135–149. Kluwer, Dordrecht (1999)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nowak, M., May, R.: Evolutionary Games and Spatial Chaos. Nature 359, 532–554 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nowak, M., Sigmund, K.: Evolution of indirect reciprocity by image scoring. Nature 393, 557–573 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Riolo, R.: The Effects of Tag-Mediated Selection of Partners in Evolving Populations Playing the Iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma. Santa Fe Institute Working Paper 97-02-016. Santa Fe, NM (1997)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Riolo, R.L., Cohen, M.D., Axelrod, R.: Evolution of cooperation without reciprocity. Nature 414, 441–443 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Roberts, G., Sherratt, T.N.: Nature 418, 449–500 (2002)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sigmund, K., Nowak, A.M.: Tides of Tolerance. Nature 414, 403–405 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Trivers, R.: The evolution of reciprocal altruism. Q. Rev. Biol. 46, 35–57 (1971)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hales, D.: Understanding Tag Systems by Comparing Tag Models. Presented at the Second Model-to-Model Workshop (M2M2) co-located with the Second European Social Simulation Association Conference (ESSA 2004), Valladolid, Spain, September 16-19 (2004), Available at
  22. 22.
    Edmonds, B., Hales, D.: Computational Simulation as Theoretical Experiment. Journal of Mathematical Sociology (in press), Available at
  23. 23.
    McDonald, A., Sen, S.: Analyzing the Effects of Tags on Promoting Cooperation in Prisoner’s Dilemma. Presented at the AAAI 2004 Fall Symposium on Artificial Multiagent Learning Symposium, Washington, D.C., October 21-24 (2004) (in press)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Hales
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of BolognaItaly

Personalised recommendations