Can genetic algorithms explain experimental anomalies? An application to common property resources



XGA=131.02 cannot statistically be distinguished from the human value at a 0.05 level.
Similarly for experienced GA, X
GA=130.40 and long term XGA=130.02. (Table 1, columns
(3), (4), and (5)).

Result 2 (Variability of aggregate resource use)

Genetic algorithm agents (GAs) exhibit a higher variability over time in aggregate resource
use
σ(X) than human agents; such variability, however, decreases with experience.

When inexperienced GA agents interact (T=32), the variability in aggregate group use as
measured by the standard deviation of resource appropriation over time is
σ(X)GA=17.50
versus
σ(X)H=12.9 with humans. With experience the variability decreases to σ(X)GA=15.03
and
σ(X)GA=14.04. An alternative measure of variability of aggregate resource use is the
percentages of periods in which aggregate payoffs are negative. For GA agents this statistics
goes from 19.59% (T=32), to 16.00% (T=64), to 14.97% (T=400) while it is 15.5% for
human agents (Table 1). A visual comparison between GA agents and human agents is
offered by Figure 1. The pattern for GA agents in Figure 1 is an example of four random
runs.

The same level of aggregate variability can hide widely different patterns of individual
variability. Before proceeding to outline Result 3, an example is presented to introduce the
precise definition of individual heterogeneity adopted throughout the paper. Consider
scenarios A and B in Table 2 with two players and four periods.

Table 2: Examples of two patterns of individual variability

Scenari
o

Agent

Period

Agent
average
xi

Indexes of variability of individual
__________________
actions__________________

1

2

3

4

Overall

D1

Overall
SD1

Across
agents
D2

Across
agents
SD2

Over
time
SD3

A

x1

12

12

12

12

12

10

5.35

10

7.07

0

X2

22

22

22

22

22

11



More intriguing information

1. The name is absent
2. The name is absent
3. The name is absent
4. Olive Tree Farming in Jaen: Situation With the New Cap and Comparison With the Province Income Per Capita.
5. Confusion and Reinforcement Learning in Experimental Public Goods Games
6. The name is absent
7. How to do things without words: Infants, utterance-activity and distributed cognition.
8. Higher education funding reforms in England: the distributional effects and the shifting balance of costs
9. Biologically inspired distributed machine cognition: a new formal approach to hyperparallel computation
10. Orientation discrimination in WS 2