{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01665034280117532, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.083333333333333, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The prisoners' dilemma: A game theoretic approach to vehicle safety

This paper assessed the policy implications of the changing demand for passenger vehicles in Australia and debunked the myth that bigger vehicles are safer. In particular, we examined the increasing demand for small cars and four-wheel drive using the classic prisoners' dilemma framework in game theory. We found that the current emphasis on occupant protection may result in a pareto inferior outcome whereas a shift in the emphasis towards non-aggressiveness of a vehicle would result in a pareto superior outcome. Among the pure strategy equilibria, the one with only small cars provides the lowest overall level of road trauma. Furthermore, we found no mixed strategy equilibrium that would produce a lower level of trauma than the pure strategy equilibria, implying that mixing vehicle type would definitely increase road trauma. In a mixed fleet, however, medium cars produced the least trauma and thus were the safest type of passenger vehicle.