Cooperation in nature and wireless communications: Real egoistic behavior is to cooperate!

Cooperation in Wireless Networks: Principles and Applications: Real Egoistic Behavior is to Cooperate!

Volumn , Issue , 2006, Pages 1-27

  Fitzek, Frank H P ^a   Katz, Marcos D ^b  

^a AALBORG UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

^b SAMSUNG Electronics   (South Korea)

Author keywords

desmondus rotundus; GSM; implicit and explicit cooperation; iterated prisoner's dilemma; multihop; nash equilibrium; pavlov; power saving; prisoner's dilemma; reciprocity; tit for tat; UMTS; wireless communication; WLAN; zero games

Indexed keywords

EID: 73149118531     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/1-4020-4711-8_1     Document Type: Chapter

References (23)

1. Akella, A., Karp, R., Papadimitrou, C., Seshan, S., and Shenker, S. (2002). Selfish behavior and stability of the internet: A game-theoretic analysis of tcp. In SIGCOMM 2002.
2. Axelrod, R. (1984). The Evolution of Cooperation. basic Books. Axelrod, R. (1997). The Complexity of Cooperation. Princeton Paperback.
3. Axelrod, R. (2004). Tournament on the 20th Anniversary of original Prisoner's Dilemma's competition. http://www.prisoners-dilemma.com.
4. Axelrod, R. and Hamilton, W. D. (1981). The evolution of cooperation. Science, 211:1390-1396.
5. Cagalj, M., Ganeriwal, S., Aad, I., and Hubaux, J. P. (2005). On selfish behavior in csma/ca networks. In IEEE Infocom 2005, Miami-FL, USA.
6. Duncan, K. (2003). Yerkes researchers first to recognize sense of fairness in nonhuman primates-findings shed light on the role of emotion in human economic interaction. Yerkes National Primate Research Center.
7. Edwin, K. (1994). Mensch und Technik-Methoden systemtechnischer Planung. trans-aix-press, Aachen.
8. Grossman, W. M. (2004). New Tack WinsPrisoner'sDilemma.Wired Magazine.
9. Holt, C. A. and Roth, A. E. (2004). The nash equilibrium: A perspective. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS), 101:3999-4002.
10. Kurzban, R. and Houser, D. (2005). Experiments investigating cooperative types in humans: A complement to evolutionary theory and simulations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS), 102(5):1803-1807.
11. Macy (1996). Natural selection and social learning in prisoner's dilemma: Co-adaptation with genetic algorithms and artificial neural networks. Sociological Methods and Research, 25:103-137.
12. Nash, J.F.(1950). Equilibrium pointsinn-person games.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS), 36:48-49.
13. Nosratinia, A., Hunter, T. E., and Hedayat, A. (2004). Cooperative communication in wireless networks. IEEE Communication Magazine, 42(10):74-80.
14. Nowak, M. and Sigmund, K. (1993). A strategy of win-stay, lose-shift that outperforms tit-for-tat in the prisoner's dilemma game. Nature, 364:56-58.
15. Pundstone, W. (1992). Prisoner's Dilemma. Doubleday.
16. Ridley, M. (1998). The Origins of Virtue : Human Instincts and the Evolution of Cooperation. tbd.
17. Smith, J. M. (1982). Evolution of the Theory of Games. Cambridge University Press.
18. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2003). Prisoner's dilemma. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/prisoner-dilemma/.
19. TNS (2005). Two-day batter life tops wish list for future all-in-one phone device. Technical report, Taylor Nelson Sofres.
20. Wedekind, C. and Milinski, M. (1996). Human cooperation in the simultaneous and the alternating prisoner's dilemma: Pavlov versus generous tit-for-tat. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS), 93(7):2686-2689.
21. Wilensky, U. (2002). Netlogo pd n-person iterated model. Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modeling, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
22. Wilkinson, G. (1984). Reciprocal food sharing in vampire bats. Nature, 308:181-184.
23. Wu, J.and Axelrod, R.(1995). HowtoCope with Noiseinthe Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 39:183-189.