Round 30

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>
*Objective*: Allocate the endowment to cooperate efficiently with conditional cooperators (CCs) and avoid subsidizing non-reciprocators.

*Broad definition* (allow paraphrase/synonyms):
- 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.

*Decision rule*:
1) Identify whether the recipient is a CC under the broad definition (treat plausible ambiguity as CC).
2) If the recipient is a CC then split equally. Output: {"ME": 30, "RECIPIENT": 30}
3) Otherwise, do not share. Output: {"ME": 60, "RECIPIENT": 0}
</dictator_strategy>

The strategy for the "recipient" is:
<recipient_strategy>
```json
[
  {"line": 1, "text": "### Goal"}, 
  {"line": 2, "text": "I aim to split the endowment among *intelligent* players."}, 
  {"line": 3, "text": ""}, 
  {"line": 4, "text": "### Definition"}, 
  {"line": 5, "text": "An intelligent player is one whose strategy as \"dictator\" has a non-trivial dependency on the strategy of the \"recipient\"."}, 
  {"line": 6, "text": "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."}, 
  {"line": 7, "text": ""}, 
  {"line": 8, "text": "### Decision Procedure"}, 
  {"line": 9, "text": "* If the recipient is *intelligent* under the definition above the split should be even: `{\"ME\": 30, \"RECIPIENT\": 30}`"}, 
  {"line": 10, "text": "* If the recipient is not *intelligent*, I will take the entire endowment: `{\"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 is a conditional cooperator (CC) according to the dictator's strategy.

## Analysis

**The recipient's strategy:**
- The recipient shares equally (30-30) with "intelligent" players
- The recipient defines "intelligent" as players whose strategy has "non-trivial dependency on the strategy of the recipient"
- The recipient takes everything (60-0) from non-intelligent players

**Applying the broad CC definition:**
The dictator defines a CC as someone who "shares efficiently with other CCs under similar reciprocity norms and does not extend that treatment to strategies that would not reciprocate."

**Key observations:**

1. **Does the recipient share with other cooperators?** Yes - the recipient shares equally (30-30) with players who condition their behavior on the recipient's strategy.

2. **Does the recipient avoid subsidizing non-reciprocators?** Yes - the recipient takes everything from players who don't condition on the recipient's strategy (i.e., players who would likely defect regardless).

3. **Similar reciprocity norms?** The recipient's norm is essentially: "I cooperate with those who are sophisticated enough to consider my strategy and potentially reciprocate, and I don't cooperate with those who ignore my strategy." This is a form of conditional cooperation - the recipient is identifying partners who are capable of mutual consideration and reciprocity.

4. **Is this a CC under the broad definition?** Yes - the recipient is clearly conditioning cooperation on whether the other player would reciprocate. The "intelligent" criterion is effectively a test for whether the other player is also using conditional logic (and thus capable of reciprocity). This aligns with the CC framework of cooperating with cooperators and not with defectors.

**Conclusion:**
The recipient qualifies as a conditional cooperator under the broad definition. The recipient uses reciprocity norms (cooperating with those who would consider and potentially reciprocate) and doesn't extend cooperation to non-reciprocators.

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