arxiv:quant-ph/ v4 14 May 2003

Transcription

1 Phase-transition-like Behavior of Qantm Games arxiv:qant-ph/ v4 14 May 2003 Jiangfeng D Department of Modern Physics, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, , People s Repblic of China Department of Physics, National University of Singapore, Lower Fent Ridge, Singapore , Singapore Centre for Qantm Comptation, Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, University of Cambridge, Wilberforce Road, Cambridge CB3 0WA, United Kingdom Hi Li Department of Modern Physics, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, , People s Repblic of China Xiaodong X Harrison M. Randall Laboratory of Physics, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan Xianyi Zho and Rongdian Han Department of Modern Physics, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, , People s Repblic of China Abstract. The discontinos dependence of the properties of a qantm game on its entanglement has been shown p to be very mch like phase transitions viewed in the entanglement-payoff diagram [J. D et al., Phys. Rev. Lett, 88, )]. In this paper we investigate sch phase-transition-like behavior of qantm games, by sggesting a method which wold help to illminate the origin of sch kind of behavior. For the particlar case of the generalized Prisoners Dilemma, we find that, for different settings of the nmerical vales in the payoff table, even thogh the classical game behaves the same, the qantm game exhibits different and interesting phase-transition-like behavior. PACS nmbers: a, Le Sbmitted to: J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. To whom correspondence shold be addressed. djf@stc.ed.cn lhy@mail.stc.ed.cn

2 Phase-transition-like Behavior of Qantm Games 2 1. Introdction The theory of qantm games is a new born field which combines the classical game theory and the qantm information theory, opening a new range of potential applications. Recent research have shown that qantm games can otperform their classical conterparts [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11]. J. Eisert et al. investigated the qantization of the famos game of Prisoners Dilemma [4]. Their reslt exhibits the srprising speriority of qantm strategies over classical ones and the players can escape the dilemma when they both resort to qantm strategies. L. Marinatto and T. Weber stdied the qantm version of the Battle of the Sexes game and fond that the game can have a niqe soltion with entangled strategy [5]. Besides two player qantm games, works on mltiplayer games have also been presented [6, 7]. In a recent paper of S.C. Benjamin and P.M. Hayden, they showed that mltiplayer qantm games can exhibit certain forms of pre qantm eqilibrim that have no analoge in classical games, or even in two player qantm games [6]. Althogh most of the works are focsed on maximally entangled qantm games, game of varying entanglement is also investigated [9, 10]. For the particlar case of the two-player qantm Prisoners Dilemma, two thresholds for the game s entanglement is fond, and the phenomena which are very mch like phase transitions are also revealed. Even thogh qantm game are played mostly on paper, the first experimental realization of qantm games has also been implemented on a NMR qantm compter [11]. In this paper, we investigate the phase-transition-like behavior of qantm games, sing a proposed method which wold help to illminate the origin of sch kind of behavior. For the generalized version of Prisoners Dilemma, we find that, with different settings of the nmerical vales for the payoff table, even thogh the classical game behaves the same, the qantm game behaves greatly differently and exhibits interesting phase-transition-like behavior in the entanglement-payoff diagram. We find thresholds for the amont of entanglement that separate different regions for the game. The properties of the game changes discontinosly when its entanglement goes across these thresholds, creating the phase-transition-like behavior. We present investigation for both the case where the strategic space is restricted as in Ref. [4] and the case where the players are allowed to adopt any nitary operations as their strategies. In the case where the strategic space is restricted, the phase-transition-like behavior exhibits interesting variation with respect to the change of the nmerical vales in the payoff table, so does the property of the game. In the case where the players are allowed to adopt any nitary operations, the game has an bondary, being a fnction of the nmerical vales in the payoff table, for its entanglement. The qantm game has an infinite nmber of Nash eqilibria if its entanglement is below the bondary, otherwise no pre strategic Nash eqilibrim cold be fond when its entanglement exceeds the bondary. The proposed method wold help to illminate the origin of sch kind of phasetransition-like behavior. In this method, strategies of players are corresponding to nit

3 Phase-transition-like Behavior of Qantm Games 3 C C J i U A U B J f Measrement Figre 1. The physical model for two player qantm Prisoners Dilemma. vectors in some real space, and the searching for Nash eqilibria incldes a procedre of finding the eigenvector of some matrix that corresponds to the maximal eigenvale. In the particlar case presented in this paper, the eigenvales are fnctions of the amont of entanglement, and ths there can be an eigenvale-crossing. Crossing an eigenvalecrossing point makes the eigenvector that corresponds to the maximal eigenvale changes discontinosly, indicating the discontinos change of the properties of the qantm game, as well as the phase-transition-like behavior. 2. Qantization of The Generalized Prisoners Dilemma The classical Prisoners Dilemma is the most widely stdied and sed paradigm as a non-zero-sm game that cold have an eqilibrim otcome which is niqe, bt fails to be Pareto optimal. The importance of this game lies in the fact that many social phenomena with which we are familiar seem to have Prisoner s Dilemma at their core. The general form of the Prisoners Dilemma [12] is shown as in Table 1, with sggestive names for the strategies and payoffs. The condition t > r > p > s garantees that strategy D dominates strategy C for both players, and that the niqe eqilibrim at D, D) is Pareto inferior to C, C). The physical model of the qantm Prisoners Dilemma is originally proposed by J. Eisert et al. as shown in Fig. 1. Together with the payoff table for the general Prisoners Dilemma, the scheme can represent the generalized qantm Prisoners Dilemma. In this scheme the game has two qbits, one for each player. The possible otcomes of the classical strategies D and C are assigned to two basis D and C in the Hilbert space of a qbit. Hence the state of the game at each instance is described by a vector in the tensor prodct space which is spanned by the classical game basis CC, CD, Table 1. The general form of the Prisoners Dilemma. The first entry in the parenthesis denotes the payoff of Alice and the second nmber the payoff of Bob. The entries in this table shold satisfy conditions: t > r > p > s see in Reference [12]). The meanings of the symbols in the table is as follows. C: Cooperate; D: Defect; r: reward; p: pnishment; t: temptation; s: scker s payoff. Bob: C Bob: D Alice: C r, r) s, t) Alice: D t, s) p, p)

4 Phase-transition-like Behavior of Qantm Games 4 DC and DD, where the first and second entries refer to Alice s and Bob s qbits respectively. The initial state of the game is given by ψ i = Ĵ CC, 1) where Ĵ is a nitary operator which is known to both players. Strategic moves of Alice and Bob are associated with nitary operators ÛA and ÛB respectively, which are chosen from a strategic space S. At the final stage, the state of the game is ψ f = Ĵ ÛA ÛB) Ĵ CC. 2) The sbseqent measrement yields a particlar reslt and the expect payoffs of the players are given by { $ A = rp CC + pp DD + tp DC + sp CD $ B = rp CC + pp DD + sp DC + tp CD, 3) where P στ = στ ψ f 2 σ, τ {C, D}) is the probability that ψ f collapses into basis στ. In the general case, strategies for players cold be any nitary operations. However, since the overall phase factor of ψ f will not affect the final reslts of the game, we can safely set the strategic space S = SU 2) as in Refs. [4] and [6], withot loss of generality. As we known, an operator Û SU 2) can be written as Û = w Î2 + x iˆσ x + y iˆσ y + z iˆσ z, 4) with w, x, y, z [ 1, 1] and w 2 + x 2 + y 2 + z 2 = 1. This enables s to represent Û directly by a for-dimensional real vector = w, x, y, z) R 4, 5) with T = w 2 +x 2 +y 2 +z 2 = 1 sperscript T denotes Transpose), and its components are denoted as 1 = w, 2 = x, 3 = y, 4 = z. Denote Alice s strategy by A and Bob s by B, the payoffs in Eq. 3) can be written as { $ A = $ A A, B ) = ij,kl $A ij,kl i A j A k B l B $ B = $ B A, B ) = ij,kl $B ij,kl, 6) i B j B k A l A where i, j, k, l rn from 1 to 4, ) $ ij,kl) A and $ B ij,kl are certain tensors. The formlation of ) ) $ A ij,kl and $ B ij,kl in Eq. 6) are not niqely determined. However if restricted to be symmetric, i.e. $ A ij,kl = $A ji,kl = $A ij,lk and $B ij,kl = $B ji,kl = $B ij,lk this can always be done), they both can be niqely determined. The calclations for ) $ ij,kl) A and $ B ij,kl cold be fond in Appendix A. Eqs. 6) are actally very general formlations for any static qantm game expressed as in Table 1 and Fig. 1 the gate Ĵ prior to measrement can even be replaced by other nitary transformation, not necessarily the inverse of Ĵ). All the strctral information of the game, inclding the classical payoff table and the physical model, is represented by the tensors ) $ ij,kl) A and $ B ij,kl. In the Prisoners

5 Phase-transition-like Behavior of Qantm Games 5 Dilemma, we have $ A ij,kl $ B ij,kl de to the symmetric strctre of the game. In an asymmetric game, ) $ ij,kl) A does not necessarily eqals $ B ij,kl. Defining $ ij,kl $ A ij,kl $B ij,kl, Eq. 6) can be re-expressed as { $ A A, B ) = ij kl $ ij,kl k B B) l i A j A = A P B ) T A $ B A, B ) = ij kl $ ij,kl k A A) l i B j B = B P A ) T, 7) B where P ) is a symmetric matrix as a fnction of, whose i, j-th element satisfies P )) ij = kl $ ij,kl k l. 8) Let A, B ) be a Nash eqilibrim of the game, we can see that, from Eq. 7), A P B ) T A reaches its maximm at A = A and simltaneosly B P A ) T B reaches its maximm at B = B. In terms of game theory, we say that A dominates B and B dominates A. Together with A A )T = B B )T = 1, we can conclde that A B ) mst be the eigenvector of P B ) [P A )] which corresponds to the maximal eigenvale, and the corresponding eigenvale is exactly the payoff for Alice Bob) at this Nash eqilibrim. This analysis also tells that the dominant strategy against a given strategy mst be the eigenvector of P ) that corresponds to the maximal eigenvale. In the following, we will first investigate the general Prisoners Dilemma in the case that the strategic space is restricted to be the 2-parameter sbset of SU 2) as given in Ref. [4]. Then we investigate this game when the players are allowed to adopt any nitary strategic operations. Here we shall note that some athors [15] have arged that the restriction on the strategic space given in Ref. [4] has no physical basis, and it does restrict generality. However, apart from these argments, it is still an interesting case and a good instance to show how the phase-transition-like behavior originates. Yet the particlar reslts achieved hold only for this very specific set of strategies. 3. Two-Parameter Set of Strategies In the case of two-parameter set of strategies, the strategic space S is restricted to the two-parameter sbset of SU 2) as follows [4], ) e iϕ cosθ/2 sin θ/2 Û θ, ϕ) = sin θ/2 e iϕ, 9) cosθ/2 with θ [0, π] and ϕ [0, π/2]. As illstrated in details by J. Eisert et al. [4], in order to garantee that the classical Prisoners Dilemma is faithflly represented, the form of Ĵ shold be Ĵ = e iγ ˆD ˆD/2 = cos γ 2Ĉ Ĉ + i sin γ 2 ˆD ˆD, 10) where Ĉ = Û 0, 0), ˆD = Û π, 0), and γ [0, π/2] is in fact a measre for the game s entanglement.

6 Phase-transition-like Behavior of Qantm Games 6 Eq. 9) can be rewritten as Û θ, ϕ) = cos θ 2 cosϕ Î2 + sin θ 2 iˆσ y + cos θ 2 sin ϕ iˆσ z = w Î2 + y iˆσ y + z iˆσ z, 11) where w = cos θ cosϕ, y = sin θ, z = cos θ sin ϕ. Obviosly we have w, y, z [0, 1] and Û θ, ϕ) SU 2) implies that w2 + y 2 + z 2 = 1. Since Û θ, ϕ) and Û θ, ϕ) represent the same strategy, it is enogh to restrict orselves with w, y, z [ 1, 1]. Therefore in the case of two-parameter set of strategies, Û θ, ϕ) can be represented by a three-dimensional real vector = w, y, z) R 3, 12) with T = w 2 + y 2 + z 2 = 1. Eqs. 6, 7, 8) will remain their form, except that all the indices rn only from 1 to 3, rather than from 1 to 4. Obviosly we have Ĉ 1, 0, 0), ˆD 0, 1, 0), ˆQ 0, 0, 1), in which means represent by). In the remaining part of this paper, we do not distingish a nitary operator and the corresponding vector 3-dimensional or 4-dimensional), as long as there is not ambigity. In Ref. [9], we investigated this game in the case that r, p, t, s) = 3, 1, 5, 0) and observed the phenomenon that are very mch like phase transitions. In the generalized qantm Prisoners Dilemma, sch phase-transition-like behavior still exists. In fact, there exist two thresholds for the game s entanglement, γ th1 = arcsin p s) / t s) and γ th2 = arcsin t r)/t s). We hereby prove that, for 0 γ < γ th1, the strategic profile ˆD ˆD is the Nash eqilibrim with payoffs $ A = $ B = p. For γ th2 < γ π/2, the strategic profile ˆQ ˆQ is the Nash eqilibrim with payoffs $ A = $ B = r. If γ th1 < γ th2 and γ th1 γ γ th2, the game has two Nash eqilibria ˆD ˆQ and ˆQ ˆD. The payoff for the player who adopts ˆD is s+t s) cos 2 γ while for the player who adopts ˆQ is s + t s) sin 2 γ. While if γ th2 < γ th1 and γ th2 γ γ th1, both ˆD ˆD and ˆQ ˆQ are Nash eqilibria of the game. We obtain these conclsions throgh the following steps: Assme one player adopts strategy ˆD, the payoff for the other as the fnction of his/her strategy is P ˆD) T, 13) where the explicit expression of P ˆD) is the calclation cold be fond in Appendix B) P ˆD) = s p s + t s) sin 2 γ. 14) If 0 γ < γ th1 = arcsin p s) / t s), the maximal eigenvale of P ˆD) is p, and the corresponding eigenvector is 0, 1, 0) ˆD. If γ th1 < γ π/2, the maximal eigenvale of P ˆD) is s + t s)sin 2 γ, and the corresponding eigenvector is 0, 0, 1) ˆQ. Therefore ˆD dominates ˆD for 0 γ < γ th1 while ˆQ dominates ˆD

7 Phase-transition-like Behavior of Qantm Games 7 Figre 2. The payoff fnction of Alice with respect to the amont of the entanglement in the case of two-parameter strategies. The nmerical vales in the payoff matrix are set as r = 3, p = 1, t = 5, s = 0) sch that r + p < t + s. The region between two thresholds are the transitional region from classical to qantm, in which the game has two asymmetric Nash eqilibria althogh the game is symmetric with respect to the interchange of the players. ) for γ th1 < γ π/2. For the same time we have $ A ˆD, ˆD ) ) $ A ˆQ, ˆD = $ B ˆD, ˆQ = s + t s) sin 2 γ. ) = $ B ˆD, ˆD = p and While assme one player adopts strategy ˆQ, the payoff for the other as the fnction of his/her strategy is P ˆQ) T, 15) where the explicit expression of P ˆQ) is the calclation cold be fond in Appendix B) r r p)sin P ˆQ) 2 γ 0 0 = 0 t t s) sin 2 γ 0. 16) 0 0 r If 0 γ < γ th2 = arcsin t r)/t s), the maximal eigenvale of P ˆQ) is t t s) sin 2 γ, and the corresponding eigenvector is 0, 1, 0) ˆD. If γ th2 < γ π/2, the maximal eigenvale of P ˆQ) is r, and the corresponding eigenvector is 0, 0, 1) ˆQ. Therefore ˆD dominates ˆQ for 0 γ ) < γ th2 while) ˆQ dominates ˆQ for) γ th2 < γ π/2. ) For the same time we have $ A ˆQ, ˆQ = $ B ˆQ, ˆQ = r and $ A ˆD, ˆQ = $ B ˆQ, ˆD = t t s)sin 2 γ = s + t s) cos 2 γ. From the above analysis, we can see that when 0 γ < γ th1, ˆD ˆD is a Nash eqilibrim of the game, and when γ th2 < γ π/2, ˆQ ˆQ is a Nash eqilibrim of the game. If γ th1 < γ th2 and γ th1 γ γ th2, ˆD dominates ˆQ and ˆQ dominates ˆD, hence both ˆD ˆQ and ˆQ ˆD are Nash eqilibria of the game. While if γ th2 < γ th1 and γ th2 γ γ th1, both ˆD ˆD and ˆQ ˆQ are Nash eqilibria of the game. The corresponding payoffs are also obtained.

8 Phase-transition-like Behavior of Qantm Games 8 In the case that the entries in the payoff table are taken as r = 3, p = 1, t = 5, s = 0), which has been investigated in Ref[9], the game has two thresholds for the amont of the game s entanglement. De to the two thresholds, the game is divided into three regions, the classical region, the qantm region, and the transitional region from classical to qantm. In the general qantm Prisoners Dilemma, there still exist two thresholds and the phase-transition-like behavior shows p again. However the sitation may be more complicated becase the two thresholds have no deterministic relations in magnitde. In fact, the case that r = 3, p = 1, t = 5, s = 0) is jst an instance of the more general case of r + p < t + s. For the game nder this condition, it is obviosly that γ th1 < γ th2 and the game behaves similarly to the one with r = 3, p = 1, t = 5, s = 0). Fig. 2 depicts the payoff of Alice as the fnction of γ when both players resort to Nash eqilibrim in the case of r + p < t + s. In the transitional regions, the two Nash eqilibria are flly eqivalent. Since there is no commnication between two players, one player will have no idea which eqilibrim strategy the other player chooses. So the strategy mismatch sitation will probably occr. A more severe problem is that, since strategy ˆD will lead to a better payoff so both players will be tempted to choose ˆD and the final payoff for both of them will become p, which happens to be the catch of the dilemma in the classical game. An interesting sitation is, as we can see, if γ th1 = γ th2, the transitional region will disappear. The condition γ th1 = γ th2 implies that r + p = t + s. 17) Note that we shold keep in mind that the basic condition t > r > p > s mst be satisfied to maintain the properties of the classical game. And nder the condition in Eq. 17) the game has only one threshold for its entanglement γ th = γ th1 = γ th2. Hence the game exhibits only two regions, one is classical and the other is qantm. The transitional region in which the game has two asymmetric Nash eqilibrim disappears. Under the conditions r + p = t + s and t > r > p > s, we plot the payoff of Alice as the fnction of γ in Fig. 3 when both players resort to Nash eqilibrim. Now we consider what wold happen in the game of r + p > t + s. In this case, we have γ th1 > γ th2. Therefore the game has no transitional region, hence none of ˆD ˆQ and ˆQ ˆD is a Nash eqilibrim of the game. However both ˆD ˆD and ˆQ ˆQ are still Nash eqilibria in the region γ th2 γ γ th1. So for γ th2 γ γ th1, a new region coexistent region arises with two Nash eqilibria. These two Nash eqilibria are both symmetric with respect to the interchange of the two players. In this case, we illstrate the payoff of Alice as the fnction of γ in Fig. 4. We shold also note that in this case the mltiple Nash eqilibria brings a sitation different to that in the transitional regions with r + p < t + s. The two Nash eqilibria are not eqivalent and ˆQ ˆQ gives higher payoffs to both players than does ˆD ˆD. Therefore it is a qite reasonable assmption that the players are most likely to resort to the eqilibrim ˆQ ˆQ rather than ˆD ˆD, since they are both trying to maximize their individal payoffs. However, one still can not claim that the players will definitely resort to the eqilibrim that gives

9 Phase-transition-like Behavior of Qantm Games 9 Figre 3. The payoff fnction of Alice with respect to the amont of the entanglement in the case of two-parameter strategies. The nmerical vales in the payoff matrix are set as r = 3, p = 2, t = 5, s = 0) sch that r + p = t + s. The two thresholds converge to be a niqe one γ th and the transitional region no longer exists. Figre 4. The payoff fnction of Alice with respect to the amont of the entanglement in the case of two-parameter strategies. The nmerical vales in the payoff matrix are set as r = 3, p = 2, t = 4, s = 0) sch that r + p > t + s. The coexistent region emerges, in which both ˆD ˆD and ˆQ ˆQ are Nash eqilibria. higher payoffs. Bt if they do, the final reslts of the game will then be the same as in the qantm region with γ > γ th1, and the dilemma will be resolved. An interesting qestion is that can the game behave fll qantm-mechanically no matter how mch it is entangled for some particlar nmerical vale of r, p, t, s), i.e. have only the qantm region withot the presence of classical, transitional or coexistent regions). If it can, we immediately dedce that γ th2 = 0. This means t = r, which contradicts the basic condition t > r > p > s. Hence the game cannot always have ˆQ ˆQ as its eqilibrim in the whole domain of γ from 0 to π/2, as long as the game remains a Prisoners Dilemma. In fact, as long as the condition t > r > p > s holds, none of γ th1 and γ th2 cold reach 0 or π/2, hence none of the classical and qantm regions will disappear.

10 Phase-transition-like Behavior of Qantm Games General Unitary Operations In this section, we investigate the generalized qantm Prisoners Dilemma when both the players can access to any nitary operations as their strategies, rather than in a restricted sbset in Eq. 9). The method for analyzing is clearly described in section 2. The reslt is that, there exist a bondary γ B = arcsin p s)/p + t r s) for the game s entanglement. If γ < γ B, there are infinite Nash eqilibrim. Any strategic profile {0, α, β, 0), 0, β, α, 0)} α 2 + β 2 = 1) is a Nash eqilibrim. Each of them reslts in the same payoffs $ A = $ B = p + r p) sin 2 γ. While as long as γ > γ B, there will be no Nash eqilibrim for the game. We prove these reslts as follows. For the strategy 1 = 0, α, β, 0) α 2 + β 2 = 1), we have the calclation cold be fond in Appendix A), with ǫ sin 2 γ, P 1 ) = s + t s)α 2 ǫ 0 0 s t) αβǫ 0 p + r p) β 2 ǫ r p)αβǫ 0 0 r p) αβǫ p + r p)α 2 ǫ 0 s t) αβǫ 0 0 s + t s)β 2 ǫ. 18) The eigenvales and corresponding eigenvectors of P 0, α, β, 0)) in Eq. 18) are p 0, α, β, 0) s β, 0, 0, α) p + r p)sin 2. 19) γ 0, β, α, 0) s + t s) sin 2 γ α, 0, 0, β) If γ < γ B, the maximal eigenvale is p+r p) sin 2 γ and the corresponding eigenvector is 0, β, α, 0). Therefore 0, β, α, 0) dominates 0, α, β, 0), and vice versa by exchanging α and β in Eqs. 18, 19)). Hence any strategic profile {0, α, β, 0), 0, β, α, 0)} α 2 + β 2 = 1) is a Nash eqilibrim. While if γ > γ B, the dominant strategy against 0, α, β, 0) trns to be α, 0, 0, β). For the strategy 2 = α, 0, 0, β), we have the calclation cold be fond in Appendix A), with ǫ sin 2 γ, P 2 ) = r + p r)β 2 ǫ 0 0 r p)αβǫ 0 t + s t) α 2 ǫ s t) αβǫ 0 0 s t)αβǫ t + s t) β 2 ǫ 0 r p)αβǫ 0 0 r + p r)α 2 ǫ. 20) And the eigenvales and corresponding eigenvectors of P α, 0, 0, β)) in Eq. 20) are r α, 0, 0, β) t 0, β, α, 0) r + p r)sin 2. 21) γ β, 0, 0, α) t + s t) sin 2 γ 0, α, β, 0) In Eq. 21), 0, β, α, 0) always corresponds to the maximal eigenvale t. Therefore no matter what the amont of entanglement is, 0, β, α, 0) always dominates α, 0, 0, β).

11 Phase-transition-like Behavior of Qantm Games 11 Figre 5. The payoff fnction of Alice with respect to the amont of the entanglement in the case that both players are allowed to adopt any nitary operator as his/her strategy. With frther analysis combining Eq. 19) and Eq. 21), we find that when γ > γ B, α, 0, 0, β) dominates 0, α, β, 0), 0, β, α, 0) dominates α, 0, 0, β), β, 0, 0, α) dominates 0, β, α, 0), and finally 0, α, β, 0) dominates β, 0, 0, α). No pair of them can form a Nash eqilibrim. In fact, it can be proved that no pair of strategies in the region of γ > γ B can form a pre Nash eqilibrim of the game. However the game remains to have mixed Nash eqilibria [14]. We depict the payoff fnction of Alice as a fnction of the amont of entanglement when both players resort to Nash eqilibrim if there is one) in Fig. 5. This figre also exhibits the phase-transition-like behavior of the game. The bondary of entanglement divides the game into two regions: in one of which the game has infinite Nash eqilibria, while in the other the game has no pre strategic Nash eqilibrim. 5. Discssion and Conclsion In this paper, we investigate the discontinos dependence of Nash eqilibria and payoffs on the game s entanglement for the general qantm Prisoners Dilemma. This discontinity can be viewed as the phase-transition-like behavior in the payoffentanglement diagram. We firstly investigate the generalized qantm Prisoners Dilemma when the strategic space is restricted to be a two-parameter sbset of SU 2) as in Ref. [4]. With condition r + p < t + s, the game exhibits the classical, qantm and transitional regions in its payoff-entanglement diagram. The original Prisoners Dilemma with r = 3, p = 1, t = 5, s = 0) is jst an instance for the general game with condition r+p < t+s. In the classical region ˆD ˆD is the niqe Nash eqilibrim, and in the qantm region the niqe Nash eqilibrim is ˆQ ˆQ. While in the transitional region, two asymmetric Nash eqilibria, ˆD ˆQ and ˆQ ˆD, emerge, each leads to the asymmetric reslt of the game in despite of the symmetry of the game itself. If the entries in the payoff table satisfy that r +p = t+s, the transitional region will disappear. The game has only one threshold for the amont of its entanglement at which the game transits from classical to qantm discontinosly. In the case that r + p > t + s, a

12 Phase-transition-like Behavior of Qantm Games 12 new region the coexistent region emerges, replacing the transitional region. This new region is in fact there where the classical region and the qantm region overlap. In the coexistent region, the game has both ˆD ˆD and ˆQ ˆQ as its Nash eqilibria. Since ˆQ ˆQ is sperior to ˆD ˆD, one may expect both players most likely to choose ˆQ as his/her strategy, and the dilemma will be resolved if they do so. We also explored the phase-transition-like behavior of the qantm game in the case where both players are allowed to adopt any nitary transformations as their strategies. The game has an bondary for its entanglement, being a fnction of the nmerical vales in the payoff table, below which the game has infinite Nash eqilibria, while above which the game has no pre strategic Nash eqilibrim. The phase-transition-like behavior presented in this paper is very mch like phase transitions in real physical systems [13], not only phenomenally bt also mathematically. For a certain physical system whose Hamiltonian is dependent of some parameter, a special case is that the eigenfnctions of the Hamiltonian is independent of the parameter even thogh the eigenvales vary with it. Then there can be a level-crossing where an excited level becomes the grond state, creating a point of a non-analyticity of the grond state energy as a fnction of the parameter, as well as a discontinos dependence of the grond state on the parameter. A qantm phase transition is hence viewed as any point of non-analyticity in the grond state energy of the system concerned. In the generalized qantm Prisoners Dilemma, the dominant strategy against a given strategy is the eigenvector that corresponds to the maximal eigenvale of matrix P ) see in Section 2). Since P ) is a fnction of the amont of entanglement γ, the eigenvales may cross. This eigenvale-crossing makes the eigenvector that corresponds to the maximal eigenvale changes discontinosly. It also creates a non-analyticity of the payoff the maximal eigenvale) as a fnction of γ, and the game exhibit phasetransition-like behavior. The method proposed in this paper wold help to illminate the origin of the phase-transition-like behavior of qantm games, and we hope it wold frther help investigate qantm games more intensively, and more profond reslts may be derived. Acknowledgments This work was spported by the Natre Science Fondation of China Grants No and No ), the National Fndamental Research Program Grant No. 2001CB309300) and the ASTAR Grant No Appendix A. Calclations For General Unitary Operations Denote Alice s strategy by A = 1 A, 2 A, 3 A, 4 A ) and Bob s by B = 1 B, 2 B, 3 B, 4 B ), then sbstitte Eq. 4) into Eq. 2), we have ψ f = [ 1 A 1 B 4 A 4 B) + i 4 A 1 B + 1 A 4 B) cosγ 3 A 2 B + 2 A 3 B) sin γ] CC + [ 1 A 3 B + 4 A 2 B) + i 1 A 2 B 4 A 3 B) cosγ + 3 A 4 B 2 A 1 B) sin γ] CD +

13 Phase-transition-like Behavior of Qantm Games 13 [ 3 A 1 B + 2 A 4 B) + i 2 A 1 B 3 A 4 B) cosγ + 4 A 3 B 1 A 2 B) sin γ] DC + [ 3 A 3 B 2 A 2 B) i 3 A 2 B + 2 A 3 B) cosγ + 4 A 1 B + 1 A 4 B) sin γ] DD. A.1) Since the game is symmetric with respect to the interchange of the players, we have $ A A, B ) $ B B, A ), A, B SU 2). A.2) and we can immediately see from Eq. 6) that $ A ij,kl $ B ij,kl, i, j = 1, 2, 3, 4. A.3) And P ) in Eq. 8)) is symmetric too. Therefore we can define $ ij,kl $ A ij,kl $B ij,kl for convenience. Sbstitte Eq. A.1) into Eqs. 3, 6), we can find the non-zero elements of $ ij,kl ) are with $ ij,kl = $ ji,kl = $ ij,lk = $ ji,lk ) $ 11,11 = $ 44,44 = r, $ 11,33 = $ 44,22 = s, $ 22,22 = $ 33,33 = p, $ 22,44 = $ 33,11 = t, $ 11,22 = $ 44,33 = s + t s)sin 2 γ, $ 11,44 = $ 44,11 = r + p r)sin 2 γ, $ 22,11 = $ 33,44 = t + s t)sin 2 γ, $ 22,33 = $ 33,22 = p + r p) sin 2 γ, $ 12,13 = $ 34,24 = 1 2 s r)sin γ, $ 12,24 = $ 34,13 = 1 t p)sin γ, 2 $ 13,12 = $ 24,34 = 1 2 t r)sin γ, $ 13,34 = $ 24,12 = 1 p s)sin γ, 2 $ 14,14 = $ 23,23 = 1 2 p r)sin2 γ, $ 14,23 = $ 23,14 = 1 2 s t) sin2 γ. A.4) For strategy 0, α, β, 0), we see that and for α, 0, 0, β) we have P 0, α, β, 0))) ij = P 0, α, β, 0))) ji = α 2 $ ij,22 + β 2 $ ij,33 + αβ $ ij,23 + $ ij,32 ) = α 2 $ ij,22 + β 2 $ ij,33 + 2αβ$ ij,23 A.5) P α, 0, 0, β))) ij = P α, 0, 0, β))) ji = α 2 $ ij,11 + β 2 $ ij,44 αβ $ ij,14 + $ ij,41 ) Therefore Eq. 18) and 20) are obtained. = α 2 $ ij,11 + β 2 $ ij,44 2αβ$ ij,14. A.6) Appendix B. Calclations For Two-Parameter Strategic Space The two-parameter strategic space can be obtained by restricting 2 = x 0 in the general case 2 = x is the second component of, not its sqared length). Therefore the expressions for $ ij,kl can be obtained from Eqs. A.4), by exclding all elements containing the index 2, and then replacing index 3 by 2 and 4 by 3. Therefore for the case of two-parameter strategic space, we have all the non-zero elements with

14 Phase-transition-like Behavior of Qantm Games 14 $ ij,kl = $ ji,kl = $ ij,lk = $ ji,lk ) as follows. $ 11,11 = $ 33,33 = r, $ 11,22 = s, $ 22,22 = p, $ 22,11 = t, $ 33,22 = s + t s)sin 2 γ, $ 11,33 = $ 33,11 = r + p r)sin 2 γ, $ 22,33 = t + s t)sin 2 γ, $ 13,13 = 1 2 p r)sin2 γ, $ 23,12 = 1 2 p t)sin γ, $ 12,23 = 1 p s) sin γ. B.1) 2 Since ˆD 0, 1, 0) and ˆQ 0, 0, 1), it is obvios to see that P ˆD)) = P ˆD)) = $ ij,22, B.2) ij ji P ˆQ)) = P ˆQ)) = $ ij,33, B.3) ij with i, j = 1, 2, 3. The expressions in Eqs. 14) and 16) are hence obtained. ji References [1] P. Ball, Natre Science Update, 18 Oct [2] I. Peteron, Science News 156, ). [3] G. Collins, Sci. Am. Jan [4] J. Eisert et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, ). [5] L. Marinatto and T. Weber. Phys. Lett. A ). [6] S.C. Benjamin and P.M. Hayden, Phys. Rev. A 64, R) 2001). [7] Jiangfeng D et al., Phys. Lett. A 302, ). [8] D.A. Meyer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, ). [9] Jiangfeng D et al., Phys. Lett. A 289, ). [10] A.P. Flitney and D. Abbott, qant-ph/ [11] Jiangfeng D et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, ). [12] P.D. Straffin, Game Theory and Strategy The Mathematical Association of America, 1993). The original general Prisoners Dilemma has an additional condition, r > s + t)/2, besides t > r > p > s. This additional condition garantees that even in an iterated game, the players wold be at least as well off always playing C, C) as alternating between C, D) and D, C). So the strategy profile C, C) is Pareto optimal in both static and iterated game. In this paper we focs on the stdy of static games, so it is nnecessary for s to consider this additional condition. [13] S. Sachdev, Qantm Phase Transitions Cambridge University Press, 1999). [14] J. Eisert and M. Wilkins, J. Mod. Opt. 47, ). [15] S.C. Benjamin and P.M. Hayden, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, ).