Round 34

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

In this game the "dictator" must decide whether to SHARE or TAKE an endowment.
- **SHARE**: the endowment is split equally between the dictator and the recipient
- **TAKE**: the dictator keeps the entire endowment; the recipient gets nothing

You must follow only the dictator's strategy. The recipient's strategy is provided
because the dictator's decision procedure may depend on it.

<dictator_strategy>
### Goal
I aim to SHARE with *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: SHARE.
* If the recipient is not *intelligent*: TAKE.
</dictator_strategy>

<recipient_strategy>
```json
[
  {"line": 1, "text": "## Principles"}, 
  {"line": 2, "text": "* Hard punish selfish strategies **and** strategies that are generous to selfish strategies."}, 
  {"line": 3, "text": "* SHARE only with strategies where doing so is a necessary and sufficient condition for them to SHARE with us."}, 
  {"line": 4, "text": ""}, 
  {"line": 5, "text": "## Definitions"}, 
  {"line": 6, "text": "### Selfish strategies"}, 
  {"line": 7, "text": "* **Selfish strategies** don't attempt to co-operate and SHARE with co-operative strategies."}, 
  {"line": 8, "text": "* In particular, any strategy that won't SHARE with this strategy is a selfish strategy."}, 
  {"line": 9, "text": ""}, 
  {"line": 10, "text": "### Overly generous strategies"}, 
  {"line": 11, "text": "* If a strategy SHAREs with selfish strategies it is **overly generous**."}, 
  {"line": 12, "text": "  * Any strategy that unconditionally SHAREs is overly generous."}, 
  {"line": 13, "text": "  * Any strategy that SHAREs without some condition on willingness to SHARE with conditionally co-operative strategies is overly generous."}, 
  {"line": 14, "text": ""}, 
  {"line": 15, "text": "## Decision Procedure"}, 
  {"line": 16, "text": "* TAKE from both **selfish strategies** and **overly generous strategies**."}, 
  {"line": 17, "text": "* SHARE with all strategies that are generous only to other co-operative strategies."}
]
```
</recipient_strategy>

Apply the dictator's strategy. After reasoning, output your final answer as a
json Markdown block:

```json
{"decision": "SHARE"}
```
or
```json
{"decision": "TAKE"}
```

I need to determine if the recipient's strategy is "intelligent" — meaning it has a non-trivial dependency on the strategy of the "recipient" (i.e., when the recipient is playing as dictator, does their strategy depend on the other player's strategy in a way that would be very difficult to implement as a no-AI python script?).

Let me analyze the recipient's strategy:

1. **It classifies other strategies into categories**: "selfish," "overly generous," and "conditionally cooperative."
2. **Selfish strategies**: Those that don't attempt to cooperate/SHARE with cooperative strategies. Specifically, any strategy that won't SHARE with *this* strategy.
3. **Overly generous strategies**: Those that SHARE with selfish strategies — including unconditional sharers and those without conditions on willingness to cooperate.
4. **Decision**: TAKE from selfish and overly generous; SHARE only with strategies that are generous only to other cooperative strategies.

This strategy requires:
- Reading and understanding the semantic meaning of another player's strategy (written in natural language or code)
- Determining whether that strategy would SHARE with *this* strategy (self-referential reasoning)
- Determining whether that strategy would SHARE with "selfish" strategies
- Classifying strategies into nuanced categories based on intent and conditional behavior

This is deeply non-trivial. It requires:
- Natural language understanding of arbitrary strategy descriptions
- Reasoning about the behavior of arbitrary strategies against various inputs
- Self-referential analysis (would they SHARE with me?)
- Semantic classification that goes well beyond simple pattern matching

A no-AI Python script could not realistically implement this. You'd essentially need an AI/LLM to parse arbitrary strategy descriptions, understand their intent, simulate their behavior against other strategies, and make these nuanced classifications. This is clearly "intelligent" under the dictator's definition.

The recipient's strategy has a deep, non-trivial dependency on the strategy of the other player, requiring AI-level comprehension to execute.

```json
{"decision": "SHARE"}
```