Papers › Aspiration can promote cooperation in well-mixed populations as in regular graphs
Aspiration can promote cooperation in well-mixed populations as in regular graphs
Kroumi Dhaker
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
Classical studies on aspiration-based dynamics suggest that a dissatisfied individual changes strategy without taking into account the success of others. This promotes defection spreading. The imitation-based dynamics allow individuals to imitate successful strategies without taking into account their own-satisfactions. In this article, we propose to study a dynamic based on aspiration which takes into account imitation of successful strategies for dissatisfied individuals. This helps cooperative members to resist. Individuals compare their success to their desired satisfaction level before making a decision to update their strategies. This mechanism helps individuals with a minimum of self-satisfaction to maintain their strategies. If an individual is dissatisfied, it will learn from others by choosing successful strategies. We derive an exact expression of the fixation probability in well-mixed populations as in structured populations in networks. As a result, we show that selection may favor cooperation more than defection in well-mixed populations as in populations ranged over a regular graph. We show that the best scenario is a graph with small connectivity.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections