ArticleRoyal Society open science2023
The evolution of cooperation in the unidirectional division of labour on a tree network.
Article in Royal Society open science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The evolution of cooperation in the unidirectional division of labour on a tree network.Royal Society open science · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Division of labour on complex networks is rarely investigated using evolutionary game theory. We investigate a division of labour where divided roles are assigned to groups on the nodes of a general unidirectional finite tree graph network. From the network's original node, a task flows and is divided along the branches. A player is randomly selected in each group of cooperators and defectors, who receives a benefit from a cooperator in the upstream group and a part of the task. A cooperator completes their part by paying a cost and then passing it downstream until the entire task is completed. Defectors do not do anything and the division of labour stops, causing all groups to suffer losses due to the incomplete task. We develop a novel method to analyse the local stability in this general tree. We discover that not the benefits but the costs of the cooperation influence the evolution of cooperation, and defections in groups that are directly related to that group's task cause damage to players in that group. We introduce two sanction systems, one of which induces the evolution of cooperation more than the system without sanctions, and promote the coexistence of cooperator and defector groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.