  The vaccination game is a social dilemma that refers to the conundrum
individuals face (to get immunized or not) when the population is exposed to an
infectious disease. The model has recently gained much traction due to the
COVID-19 pandemic since the public perception of vaccines plays a significant
role in disease dynamics. This paper studies the vaccination game in the
thermodynamic limit with an analytical method derived from the 1D Ising model
called Nash equilibrium mapping. The individual dilemma regarding Vaccination
comes from an internal conflict wherein one tries to balance the perceived
advantages of immunizing with the apparent risks associated with Vaccination
which they hear through different news media. We compare the results of Nash
equilibrium(NE) mapping to other 1D Ising-based models, namely Darwinian
evolution and agent-based simulation. This study aims to analyze the behaviour
of an infinite population regarding what fraction of people choose to vaccinate
or not vaccinate. While Nash equilibrium mapping and agent-based simulation
agree mostly, Darwinian evolution strays far from the two models. It fails to
predict the equilibrium behaviour of players in the population reasonably. We
apply the results of our study to analyze the Astra-Zeneca(AZ) COVID-19 vaccine
risk versus disease deaths debate, both via NE mapping and agent-based method.
Both predict near 100% AZ vaccine coverage for people above 40, notwithstanding
the risk. At the same time, younger people show a slight reluctance. We predict
that while government intervention via vaccination mandates and advertisement
campaigns is unnecessary for the older population, for the younger population
(ages: 20-39), some encouragement from the government via media campaigns and
vaccine mandates may be necessary.
