  Researchers have explored the performance of Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma
strategies for decades, from the celebrated performance of Tit for Tat to the
introduction of the zero-determinant strategies and the use of sophisticated
learning structures such as neural networks. Many new strategies have been
introduced and tested in a variety of tournaments and population dynamics.
Typical results in the literature, however, rely on performance against a small
number of somewhat arbitrarily selected strategies in a small number of
tournaments, casting doubt on the generalizability of conclusions. In this
work, we analyze a large collection of 195 strategies in thousands of computer
tournaments, present the top performing strategies across multiple tournament
types, and distill their salient features. The results show that there is not
yet a single strategy that performs well in diverse Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma
scenarios, nevertheless there are several properties that heavily influence the
best performing strategies. This refines the properties described by Axelrod in
light of recent and more diverse opponent populations to: be nice, be
provocable and generous, be a little envious, be clever, and adapt to the
environment. More precisely, we find that strategies perform best when their
probability of cooperation matches the total tournament population's aggregate
cooperation probabilities. The features of high performing strategies help cast
some light on why strategies such as Tit For Tat performed historically well in
tournaments and why zero-determinant strategies typically do not fare well in
tournament settings. Furthermore, our findings have implications for the future
training of autonomous agents, as understanding the crucial features for
incorporation into these agents becomes essential.
