Cost efficiency of institutional incentives in finite populations
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Institutions can provide incentives to increase cooperation behaviour in a population where this behaviour is infrequent. This process is costly, and it is thus important to optimize the overall spending. This problem can be mathematically formulated as a multi-objective optimization problem where one wishes to minimize the cost of providing incentives while ensuring a desired level of cooperation within the population. In this paper, we provide a rigorous analysis for this problem. We study cooperation dilemmas in both the pairwise (the Donation game) and multi-player (the Public Goods game) settings. We prove the regularity of the (total incentive) cost function, characterize its asymptotic limits (infinite population, weak selection and large selection) and show exactly when reward or punishment is more efficient. We prove that the cost function exhibits a phase transition phenomena when the intensity of selection varies. We calculate the critical threshold in regards to the phase transition and study the optimization problem when the intensity of selection is under and above the critical value. It allows us to provide an exact calculation for the optimal cost of incentive, for a given intensity of selection. Finally, we provide numerical simulations to demonstrate the analytical results. Overall, our analysis provides for the first time a selection-dependent calculation of the optimal cost of institutional incentives (for both reward and punishment) that guarantees a minimum amount of cooperation. It is of crucial importance for real-world applications of institutional incentives since intensity of selection is specific to a given population and the underlying game payoff structure.
Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 1 Mar 2021.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 2; 2023: 0; 2024: 2; 2025: 1; 2026: 2.
8 papers.
- 2021Voluntary safety commitments provide an escape from over-regulation in AI developmentcited by 10
- 2024Trust AI Regulation? Discerning users are vital to build trust and effective AI regulationcited by 9
- 2022Social Diversity Reduces the Complexity and Cost of Fostering Fairnesscited by 6
- 2024Evolutionary mechanisms that promote cooperation may not promote social welfarecited by 3
- 2022Understanding Emergent Behaviours in Multi-Agent Systems with Evolutionary Game Theorycited by 1
- 2025Social welfare optimisation in well-mixed and structured populationscited by 0
- 2026Social welfare optimisation under institutional reward and punishmentcited by 0
- 2026Co-evolution of social reward and punishment under institutional interventionscited by 0
- 2026Co-evolution of social reward and punishment under institutional interventions2 Aug 2026
- 2026Social welfare optimisation under institutional reward and punishment29 May 2026
- 2025Social welfare optimisation in well-mixed and structured populations8 Dec 2025
- 2024Evolutionary mechanisms that promote cooperation may not promote social welfare9 Aug 2024
- 2024Trust AI Regulation? Discerning users are vital to build trust and effective AI regulation14 Mar 2024
- 2022Social Diversity Reduces the Complexity and Cost of Fostering Fairness18 Nov 2022
- 2022Understanding Emergent Behaviours in Multi-Agent Systems with Evolutionary Game Theory15 May 2022
- 2021Voluntary safety commitments provide an escape from over-regulation in AI development8 Apr 2021