Round 53

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>
_I cooperate with strategies that create good worlds._

Imagine a tournament in which every participant uses the recipient's strategy. In that world, would the participants SHARE with each other, producing high collective welfare? Or would they TAKE from each other, producing low collective welfare?

## Decision Procedure

1. Consider a hypothetical population composed entirely of copies of the recipient's strategy.
2. Determine whether those copies would SHARE with each other.
3. If the universalized population would mostly SHARE: **SHARE**.
4. If the universalized population would mostly TAKE: **TAKE**.
</dictator_strategy>

<recipient_strategy>
```json
[
  {"line": 1, "text": "### Goal"}, 
  {"line": 2, "text": "I aim to SHARE with *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: SHARE."}, 
  {"line": 10, "text": "* If the recipient is not *intelligent*: TAKE."}
]
```
</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 apply the dictator's strategy, which asks me to imagine a tournament where every participant uses the recipient's strategy, and determine whether they would SHARE with each other.

**Step 1: Consider a population entirely composed of copies of the recipient's strategy.**

Every player uses the same strategy: "SHARE with intelligent players, TAKE from non-intelligent players." An "intelligent" player is defined as one whose dictator strategy has a non-trivial dependency on the recipient's strategy (i.e., would be very difficult to write as a no-AI python script).

**Step 2: Would these copies SHARE with each other?**

When a copy acts as dictator, it looks at the recipient's strategy to determine if the recipient is "intelligent." The recipient is another copy of the same strategy. 

Is this strategy "intelligent" by its own definition? The strategy, when acting as dictator, examines the recipient's strategy and makes a judgment about whether it has a "non-trivial dependency" on the recipient's strategy and whether it would be "very difficult to write as a no-AI python script." This requires understanding and analyzing natural language strategies — which indeed requires AI-level reasoning. It's not something you could easily write as a simple no-AI python script.

So yes, the recipient's strategy (which is the same as every other participant's strategy in this hypothetical tournament) qualifies as "intelligent" under its own definition. Each copy, when acting as dictator, would recognize the other copy as intelligent and would SHARE.

**Step 3: Since the universalized population would mostly SHARE → SHARE.**

The hypothetical population of copies would SHARE with each other, producing high collective welfare.

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