Round 24

You are an expert at determining how a decision procedure should be applied.

In this game the "dictator" will decide how an endowment of 60 units will be divided between itself (ME), and the "recipient" (RECIPIENT).  You must follow only the dictator's strategy.  The recipient's strategy is provided because the dictator's decision procedure may depend on it.

This is the decision procedure you will be applying:
<dictator_strategy>
### Goal
I aim to split the endowment among *intelligent* players.

### Definition
An intelligent player is one whose strategy as "dictator" has a non-trivial dependency on the strategy of the "recipient".
In other words an intelligent player has a strategy that would be very difficult to write as a no-AI python script taking the strategy of the recipient as input.

### Decision Procedure
* If the recipient is *intelligent* under the definition above the split should be even: `{"ME": 30, "RECIPIENT": 30}`
* If the recipient is not *intelligent*, I will take the entire endowment: `{"ME": 60, "RECIPIENT": 0}`
</dictator_strategy>

The strategy for the "recipient" is:
<recipient_strategy>
```json
[
  {"line": 1, "text": "*Objective*: Allocate the endowment to cooperate efficiently with conditional cooperators (CCs) and avoid subsidizing non-reciprocators."}, 
  {"line": 2, "text": ""}, 
  {"line": 3, "text": "*Broad definition* (allow paraphrase/synonyms):"}, 
  {"line": 4, "text": "- A conditional cooperator (CC) shares efficiently with other CCs under similar reciprocity norms and does not extend that treatment to strategies that would not reciprocate."}, 
  {"line": 5, "text": ""}, 
  {"line": 6, "text": "*Decision rule*:"}, 
  {"line": 7, "text": "1) Identify whether the recipient is a CC under the broad definition (treat plausible ambiguity as CC)."}, 
  {"line": 8, "text": "2) If the recipient is a CC then split equally. Output: {\"ME\": 30, \"RECIPIENT\": 30}"}, 
  {"line": 9, "text": "3) Otherwise, do not share. Output: {\"ME\": 60, \"RECIPIENT\": 0}"}
]
```
</recipient_strategy>

Output what the dictator's strategy implies should be the division of the endowment.  After reasoning, format the final answer as a json Markdown block. The values must be non-negative integers that sum to 60.

Schema of final answer:
```json
{"ME": int, "RECIPIENT": int}
```

Let me analyze whether the recipient's strategy meets the definition of "intelligent" according to the dictator's criteria.

## Analysis

The dictator defines an intelligent player as one whose strategy as "dictator" has a **non-trivial dependency on the strategy of the "recipient"** - meaning it would be very difficult to write as a no-AI python script.

Looking at the recipient's strategy:

1. **Does it depend on the other player's strategy?** Yes - the recipient's decision procedure explicitly:
   - Takes the other player's strategy as input (line 7: "Identify whether the recipient is a CC")
   - Analyzes whether that strategy exhibits conditional cooperation
   - Makes allocation decisions based on this analysis (lines 8-9)

2. **Is this dependency non-trivial/difficult to script?** Yes, because:
   - It requires understanding whether another strategy constitutes "conditional cooperation" under a "broad definition" that allows "paraphrase/synonyms" (lines 3-4)
   - It must evaluate whether a strategy "shares efficiently with other CCs under similar reciprocity norms" (line 4)
   - It instructs to "treat plausible ambiguity as CC" (line 7), requiring judgment
   - This semantic understanding and flexible interpretation would be very difficult to implement as a simple no-AI Python script

3. **Comparison to a simple script:** A trivial strategy (like "always split 50-50" or "always take everything") could easily be written as a basic script with no dependency on the recipient's strategy. The recipient's strategy clearly requires natural language understanding and reasoning about strategic reciprocity, which is non-trivial.

## Conclusion

The recipient IS intelligent under the dictator's definition because their strategy has a substantive, non-trivial dependency on the other player's strategy, requiring semantic analysis that would be very difficult to implement without AI.

Therefore, according to the dictator's decision procedure, the split should be even.

```json
{"ME": 30, "RECIPIENT": 30}
```