Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #3113
| From | Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: Basic prisoner's dilemma? |
| Date | 2011-04-18 21:26 +0200 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <ioi390$90n$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <d97822e4-ee7c-458d-8818-07007fb714e8@k3g2000prl.googlegroups.com> <iohs19$f1g$1@dont-email.me> <iohsn8$hri$1@news.albasani.net> |
On 18/04/2011 19:34, Lew allegedly wrote:
> Daniele Futtorovic wrote:
>> Basic tit-for-tat is as follows:
>> - if it's the first time you encounter that opponent (this implies you
>> keep a 'memory' of previous encounters), cooperate.
>> - otherwise, replicate that opponent's last move.
>>
>> In code (assuming oppHistory contains only the history with "this"):
>>
>> public String chooseAction(
>> ArrayList<String> myHistory, ArrayList<String> oppHistory)
>> {
>> return oppHistory.isEmpty() ? "COOPERATE"
>> : oppHistory.get( oppHistory.size()
> - 1
>> );
>> }
>> (or oppHistory.get(0), depending on whether it's used as a FIFO or a
>> LIFO).
>>
>>
>> You can add various tricks, but don't expect to get far with them,
>> because tit-for-tat is the evolutionary stable strategy.
>>
>> If you're interested in the topic apart from the programming aspect, I
>> *very* strongly suggest you read Dawkins' "Selfish Gene" and "Blind
>> Watchmaker". Even if you're not, by the way -- those are IMHO must-reads.
>
Well spotted. Thanks, Lew.
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Basic prisoner's dilemma? theglazeb <theglazeb@gmail.com> - 2011-04-17 19:51 -0700
Re: Basic prisoner's dilemma? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-17 23:15 -0400
Re: Basic prisoner's dilemma? Esmond Pitt <esmond.pitt@bigpond.com> - 2011-04-18 13:54 +1000
Re: Basic prisoner's dilemma? theglazeb <theglazeb@gmail.com> - 2011-04-17 22:08 -0700
Re: Basic prisoner's dilemma? Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-04-17 23:47 -0700
Re: Basic prisoner's dilemma? markspace <-@.> - 2011-04-18 00:14 -0700
Re: Basic prisoner's dilemma? rossum <rossum48@coldmail.com> - 2011-04-18 13:01 +0100
Re: Basic prisoner's dilemma? Bent C Dalager <bcd@pvv.ntnu.no> - 2011-04-18 13:38 +0000
Re: Basic prisoner's dilemma? Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-04-18 19:22 +0200
Re: Basic prisoner's dilemma? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-18 13:34 -0400
Re: Basic prisoner's dilemma? Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-04-18 21:26 +0200
Re: Basic prisoner's dilemma? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-18 16:33 -0400
Re: Basic prisoner's dilemma? Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-04-18 23:50 +0200
Re: Basic prisoner's dilemma? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-18 18:37 -0400
Re: Basic prisoner's dilemma? markspace <-@.> - 2011-04-18 15:51 -0700
Re: Basic prisoner's dilemma? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-04-19 16:14 -0400
csiph-web