Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,590

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 302 of the 302 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Statistical physics of human cooperation

Open access
Perc, Matjaž, Jordan, Jillian J., Rand, David G., Wang, Zhen, Boccaletti, Stefano, Szolnoki, Attila·2017·Physics Reports
DOI 10.1016/j.physrep.2017.05.004
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Abstract Extensive cooperation among unrelated individuals is unique to humans, who often sacrifice personal benefits for the common good and work together to achieve what they are unable to execute alone. The evolutionary success of our species is indeed due, to a large degree, to our unparalleled other-regarding abilities. Yet, a comprehensive understanding of human cooperation remains a formidable challenge. Recent research in the social sciences indicates that it is important to focus on the collective behavior that emerges as the result of the interactions among individuals, groups, and even societies. Non-equilibrium statistical physics, in particular Monte Carlo methods and the theory of collective behavior of interacting particles near phase transition points, has proven to be very valuable for understanding counterintuitive evolutionary outcomes. By treating models of human cooperation as classical spin models, a physicist can draw on familiar settings from statistical physics. However, unlike pairwise interactions among particles that typically govern solid-state physics systems, interactions among humans often involve group interactions, and they also involve a larger number of possible states even for the most simplified description of reality. The complexity of solutions therefore often surpasses that observed in physical systems. Here we review experimental and theoretical research that advances our understanding of human cooperation, focusing on spatial pattern formation, on the spatiotemporal dynamics of observed solutions, and on self-organization that may either promote or hinder socially favorable states.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.physrep.2017.05.004

Cites

302 of 302 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Items 201–302 of 302

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. Balafoutas, 2014, Third-party punishment and counter-punishment in one-shot interactions, Econom. Lett., 122, 308, 10.1016/j.econlet.2013.11.028 · doi:10.1016/j.econlet.2013.11.028
  2. Capraro, 2015, Social setting, intuition and experience in laboratory experiments interact to shape cooperative decision-making, Proc. R Soc. B, 282, 20150237, 10.1098/rspb.2015.0237 · DOI
  3. Gächter, 2012, Carrot or stick?, Nature, 483, 39, 10.1038/483039a · doi:10.1038/483039a
  4. Dickman, 2001, First- and second-order phase transitions in a driven lattice gas with nearest-neighbor exclusion, Phys. Rev. E, 64, 016124, 10.1103/PhysRevE.64.016124 · doi:10.1103/physreve.64.016124
  5. Szolnoki, 2002, Dynamical mean-field approximation for a pair contact process with a particle source, Phys. Rev. E, 66, 057102, 10.1103/PhysRevE.66.057102 · doi:10.1103/physreve.66.057102
  6. Dickman, 2002, n-site approximations and coherent-anomaly-method analysis for a stochastic sandpile, Phys. Rev. E, 66, 036122, 10.1103/PhysRevE.66.036122 · doi:10.1103/physreve.66.036122
  7. Binder, 1980, Phase diagrams and critical behavior in ising square lattices with nearest- and next-nearest-neighbor interactions, Phys. Rev. B, 21, 1941, 10.1103/PhysRevB.21.1941 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.21.1941
  8. Vazquez, 2011, Phys. Rev. Lett., 106, 235702, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.235702 · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.106.235702
  9. Noest, 1988, Phys. Rev. B, 38, 2715, 10.1103/PhysRevB.38.2715 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.38.2715
  10. Wu, 2005, Spatial prisoner’s dilemma game with volunteering in Newman-Watts small-world networks, Phys. Rev. E, 71, 037103, 10.1103/PhysRevE.71.037103 · doi:10.1103/physreve.71.037103
  11. Laird, 2008, Does local competition increase the coexistence of species in intransitive networks?, Ecology, 89, 237, 10.1890/07-0117.1 · doi:10.1890/07-0117.1

Cited by

See all 1,590

Metadata

Authors
Perc, M., Jordan, J. J., Rand, D. G., Wang, Z., Boccaletti, S., & Szolnoki, A.
Venue
Physics Reports
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-05
Volume
687
Pages
1-51
ISSN
0370-1573 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.physrep.2017.05.004
OpenAlex
W2618208446
Cited by
1,590
References
302
FWCI
408.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze
Licence
Funders
  • Slovenian Research Agency (J1-7009, P5-0027)
  • Templeton World Charity Foundation (TWCF0209)
  • Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (D17AC00005)
  • National Key Research and Development Program (2016YFB0800602)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (61471299)
  • Hungarian National Research Fund (K-120785)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.