Simultaneously, the police offer each prisoner a Faustian bargain. They plan to sentence both to a year in prison on a lesser charge. The police admit they don't have enough evidence to convict the pair on the principal charge. Each prisoner is in solitary confinement with no means of speaking to or exchanging messages with the other. Two members of a criminal gang are arrested and imprisoned. William Poundstone described this 'typical contemporary version' of the game in his 1993 book Prisoner's Dilemma: In casual usage, the label 'prisoner's dilemma' may be applied to any situation in which two entities could gain important benefits from cooperating or suffer from failing to do so, but find it difficult or expensive to coordinate their activities. The prisoner's dilemma models many real-world situations involving strategic behavior.

Tucker later formalized the game by structuring the rewards in terms of prison sentences and named it the 'prisoner's dilemma'. This dilemma was originally framed by Merrill Flood and Melvin Dresher in 1950 while they worked at the RAND Corporation. The prisoner's dilemma is a game theory thought experiment that involves two rational agents, each of whom can cooperate for mutual benefit or betray their partner ('defect') for individual reward. Not to be confused with Three Prisoners problem, Unexpected hanging paradox, 100 prisoners problem, or Innocent prisoner's dilemma.

Odd behaviour with poser pro 11.1