Nightly arXiv Build-off · Builder C

Spatial Prisoner's Dilemma: Segregation Edition

Two grids. Identical multiset of environmental quality values. Identical starting cooperators. The only difference is how the good and bad patches are arranged in space — one shuffled at random, one grown into contiguous blocks. Press play and watch cooperation diverge anyway. The live spatial correlation index (a Moran's I on the quality field) tracks which regime you're in — it's what actually predicts the outcome, not the average quality (which is the same for both boards, always).

Grounded in arXiv:2604.12546 — Kargaran, Kaveh, Chatterjee, "Predicting success of cooperators across arbitrary heterogeneous environmental landscapes"

Run

Speed (gens/sec)8

Game Rules

Temptation b₀1.80

Quality sensitivity α0.30

Mutation rate0.5%

Classic Nowak–May spatial PD matrix per pairwise neighbor game: mutual cooperation pays R = 1+α·(2q−1) (scaled by the focal cell's own quality q), a lone defector exploiting a cooperator pays T = b₀, everything else pays 0. Defaults sit right at the edge where cooperation collapses under a random layout but survives under a clustered one — that knife-edge is the point.

Paint

Brush mode

Brush radius2

Click / drag directly on either board. Manual edits override that board's generated field until the next "New Landscape".

Board A — Intermixed

Clustering0 · Fully random

Force strict checkerboard (max intermix)

Board B — Segregated

Clustering9 · Segregated

Force strict checkerboard (max intermix)

Board A · Intermixed

same quality pool, shuffled

Coop %

50.0

SCI (Moran's I)

0.00

Avg Quality

0.50

Generation

Board B · Segregated

same quality pool, clustered

Coop %

50.0

SCI (Moran's I)

0.00

Avg Quality

0.50

Generation

Cooperator fraction over time

Board A — Intermixed Board B — Segregated Both computed from an identical value pool — divergence is caused purely by spatial arrangement.

Mechanics: 80×80 lattice, toroidal (wrap-around) boundary with an 8-cell Moore neighborhood precomputed once per cell (every cell always has exactly 8 neighbors — no edge bias). Each generation: (1) every cell plays the standard Prisoner's Dilemma pairwise against each of its 8 neighbors (mutual cooperation pays R, scaled up or down by the focal cell's own environmental quality; a defector exploiting a cooperator pays flat temptation T=b₀; mutual defection and being exploited both pay 0) and its payoff is the sum over all 8 games; (2) each cell deterministically imitates the highest-payoff strategy among itself and its 8 neighbors (Nowak–May "imitate the best", synchronous, double-buffered so no read/write races); (3) a small mutation rate flips a few cells at random each round to keep dynamics alive instead of freezing. The spatial correlation index shown per board is Moran's I computed on that board's quality field over the same 8-neighbor graph: ≈0 for a random shuffle, → +1 for large contiguous good/bad blocks, → −1 for a strict checkerboard. Paper: arXiv:2604.12546.