Prisoner's Dilemma

[Lemniscate]

Well for some reason I have been reading about Game Theory recently, and one aspect of it caught my eye. It is called the prisoner's dilemma.

 

Two men are arrested and taken to be interrogated separately. Each is given two choices, to say stay silent, or speak.

• If both stay silent, then they ach get the minimum 5 months sentence.

• If one speaks and the other stays silent, then the one who stays silent gets a 10 year sentence

• If both speak, then each of them gets a 5 year sentence

Upon analysis, it is seen that both prisoners would be best served by choosing not to speak, getting them the shortest time in prison.

 

However, both prisoners are more likely to choose to speak, not trusting the other one and not being able to know the other one’s choice until they have chosen.

 

So, even though they would both be best served by staying quiet, neither will do that for fear of a ten year sentence should the other one talk.

 

If both choose to talk, then they each still get a sentence longer than the one they would have gotten had they both stayed quiet.

 

This dilemma shows that people will act towards the safest route, instead of the route with the best personal payoff. These actions can come out of fear, lack of knowledge, or mistrust.

 

 

I was thinking, how would this apply to Yu-Gi-Oh?

[Monkey]

How could this apply to Yu-Gi-Oh? How is taking the safe way or the most personal way relevant? Just out of curiosity

[Lemniscate]

when people choose what cards to play, (i.e. whether to summon a strong monster, or play a spell or trap based on guessing what cards your opponent has face-down or in their hand. If you think that they have a face-down Magic Drain, then you will most likely choose not to play a spell card.)

[CrabHelmet]

Over an extended series of trials with a sizable population, optimal strategy is to stay silent the first time one is paired with another given prisoner, and to thereafter make whatever choice the other prisoner made last time.

 

In a single trial which will never be repeated, however, optimal strategy is to speak.

[Monkey]

Over an extended series of trials with a sizable population' date=' optimal strategy is to stay silent the first time one is paired with another given prisoner, and to thereafter make whatever choice the other prisoner made last time.

 

In a single trial which will never be repeated, however, optimal strategy is to speak.

[/quote'] That is true, because if you speak, you will be guaranteed to 5 years only. Since there is no 0 years in the slammer, just speak because then you'll only get 5. No wonder Crab Helmet is a genius.....

[Zeroshot]

Applying to Yu Gi Oh, your saying that if my opponent summons a strong monster and I have no strong monster in my hand at the time, I get sent to prison for 10 years?

[Lemniscate]

Wow, did you know that the thing Crab Helmet just said is what it said on the Wikipedia page for the Prisoner' Dilemma!!!! Wow!!!! Genius!!!!

I know that it is best to speak in a single-trial (which is what the prisoner's dilemma is) that is what I said (different wording) within the initial post!!!

The purpose of the Prisoner's Dilemma is to show that people will act AGAINST their own self interest, choosing NOT to make to the choice that, in theory, would afford them the greatest reward.

This idea is commonly applied to ecomonomic situation where (for example) two Nations are on the brink of war, they each have two choices, to attack or to now attack.

Naturally, it is best for BOTH nations to choose to not attack, but because they expect the other nation to attack, they attack so as to inflict damage upo the other nation.

When both nations do this, both recieve casualties, and both are plummeted into war.

[Zeroshot]

Wow, did you know that the thing Crab Helmet just said is what it said on the Wikipedia page for the Prisoner' Dilemma!!!! Wow!!!! Copypasta!!!!

 

Fix'd

[Lemniscate]

sorry, i was rude.

I shouldn't have insulted you, Crab Helmet. sorry again.

[CrabHelmet]

It's not my fault that Wikipedia happens to know what it's talking about. Anyhow, I didn't need to look it up on Wikipedia; the solution is common knowledge.

 

The purpose of the Prisoner's Dilemma is to show that people will act AGAINST their own self interest' date=' choosing NOT to make to the choice that, in theory, would afford them the greatest reward.

[/quote']

 

Nonsense. The purpose of the Prisoner's Dilemma is to show that people will act in accordance with their own self-interest. Regardless of the other prisoner's actions, your own sentence will be reduced by speaking.

 

The reason that this is not optimal strategy in repeated trials is that the opponent will ultimately reciprocate in kind, and because a gain for one player does not imply an equal loss for the other.

[Akira]

The Stanford and Milgram experiments proved just how easy it is to corrupt human morals.

 

It's most likely that both prisoners would speak.

[Pikachu]

What strategy

 

That's why we have this: to trap our opponents