Figure 2.
(a) Improvement in cooperation level obtained from IRCOM and COMP compared to the case where there is no IRCOM, as a function of the cost of arranging commitment and the compensation cost δ. Improvement is achieved for a wide range of
and δ. It is most significant when
is rather high and δ is not too large, i.e. the commitment deal is weak (see Figure S1 in SI for the improvement obtained in percentage, and also for other parameter values). (b) Such improvement as a function of the accuracy-to-confidence ration, r, and for different commitment deals. In general, the larger r, the more significant improvement is obtained. Furthermore, when r is sufficiently high, larger improvement is obtained when it is costly to arrange commitments and/or a high compensation is difficult to enforced. Parameters: b = 4, c = 1, N = 100, and β = 0.1. In panel (a), r = 1.