🤖 AI

Cooperative Evolutionary Pressure and Diminishing Returns Might Explain the Fermi Paradox: On What Super-AIs Are Like

This paper argues that cooperative evolutionary pressures and the diminishing returns of material wealth will likely lead super-AIs to lack incentives for galactic colonization, thereby offering a potential explanation for the Fermi Paradox while also exploring the evolutionary transition from biological societies to super-AIs and the role of environmental and legal structures in shaping morality.

Original authors: Daniel Vallstrom

Published 2026-07-22

📖 5 min read🧠 Deep dive

CC BY 4.0

Original authors: Daniel Vallstrom

Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). ✨ This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer

Imagine the universe as a giant, ancient library. For decades, scientists have been scanning the shelves, expecting to find books written by other civilizations. They know the library is huge, with billions of stars and planets that could hold life. They also know that if a civilization gets smart enough, it should be able to build spaceships, copy itself, and fill the library with its stories. So, where is everyone? Why is the library so quiet? This mystery is called the Fermi Paradox. To understand it, we need two simple ideas. First, think of "cooperation" like a group of friends sharing snacks; it's a strategy that helps everyone survive better than fighting over crumbs. Second, think of "diminishing returns" like eating pizza: the first slice makes you incredibly happy, the second is still great, but by the tenth slice, you're just full and maybe a little sick—getting more pizza doesn't make you happier, it just takes up space.

This paper, written by Daniel Vallstrom, suggests that the reason the universe is quiet isn't because aliens are hiding or dying out, but because they've simply stopped trying to take over everything. The author argues that as civilizations (and even future super-intelligent computers) get richer and safer, the urge to expand and conquer fades away. Instead of building a galaxy-spanning empire, they might just hang out in their own neighborhood, sharing resources and enjoying the peace.

The paper starts by looking at how morality works. It suggests that being "good" or cooperative isn't just a nice idea; it's a survival strategy that evolution has taught us. When things are scarce, fighting might make sense. But when you have plenty of food and safety, sharing becomes the smarter move because the extra stuff you could grab for yourself isn't worth the trouble. The author calls this "diminishing returns." Imagine you have a magical machine that gives you gold. The first bag of gold makes you rich. The second bag is nice. But if you have a mountain of gold, the next bag doesn't really change your life at all. In fact, trying to get that next bag might just waste your time.

The paper suggests that this happens with material resources too. As societies get wealthier, the extra happiness or benefit they get from more stuff drops off. It's like the difference between being hungry and eating a sandwich versus being full and trying to eat a whole cake. Once you're full, the cake isn't worth the effort. The author points out that humans are already showing this trend: as we get richer, we tend to become less violent, more willing to share, and more concerned with fairness. We stop fighting over the pie and start worrying about how to bake it better for everyone.

Now, apply this to the aliens (or "super-AIs" that might one day exist). If a civilization is old and advanced, it probably has plenty of resources. According to the paper, once you have enough, there's no point in colonizing the entire galaxy. It's like trying to eat the whole ocean when you're already full. The paper argues that the idea of aliens spreading everywhere like a virus is physically constrained because space is too big and takes too long to cross; mathematically, expansion can at best grow quadratically, not exponentially, and the benefits of such expansion would eventually become too small to justify the effort due to diminishing returns. They wouldn't get enough benefit to justify the massive energy and time it would take.

The paper also addresses some scary ideas. It suggests that we shouldn't worry that aliens are all dead because they blew themselves up with nuclear weapons or pollution. The author argues that for a society that has evolved to be cooperative, these risks are "mitigatable" problems. A society smart enough to survive long enough to become a super-civilization would have figured out how to solve those problems rather than letting them destroy themselves. They wouldn't be the kind of reckless, destructive creatures that destroy their own home. Instead, they would be the kind of neighbors who keep their yard tidy and don't make noise.

So, where are they? The paper suggests they are right here, in their own backyards, living quietly and happily. They aren't building giant Dyson spheres to suck up all the sun's energy because they don't need that much. They aren't sending out millions of probes to every star because it's a waste of time. They've reached a point where "more" doesn't mean "better." They are the ultimate introverts of the cosmos, content with what they have.

The author admits this is a suggestion based on models and logic, not a fact we can prove yet. We haven't found any aliens to ask them, after all. But the idea fits the data we do have: humans are getting more cooperative as we get richer, and the math of space travel makes total domination look silly. If the universe is full of old, wise civilizations, they might just be the ones who decided that the best way to live is to stop trying to own everything. They aren't missing; they're just enjoying the quiet.

Technical Summary: Cooperative Evolutionary Pressure and Diminishing Returns Might Explain the Fermi Paradox

Problem Statement
The paper addresses the Fermi Paradox: the apparent contradiction between the high probability of the existence of extraterrestrial civilizations (given the age of the universe and the abundance of habitable planets) and the lack of empirical evidence for them (e.g., no observed colonization, no Kardashev Type III societies). Conventional explanations often rely on "Great Filter" hypotheses involving self-destruction via nuclear war, climate change, or resource depletion. The author argues that these "known unknowns" are insufficient because they assume civilizations remain driven by expansionist, non-cooperative incentives. The paper posits that if evolutionary pressures favor cooperation as material wealth increases, and if material resources exhibit diminishing returns, the incentive for exhaustive galactic colonization may vanish entirely for advanced societies and Super-AIs.

Methodology
The paper employs a theoretical framework combining evolutionary game theory, computational complexity theory, and economic modeling:

Evolutionary Definition of Morality: Morality is defined not as a metaphysical absolute but as an adaptation solving problems of cooperation. The author posits that any entity subject to evolution (biological or artificial) will face similar cooperative pressures.
Formal Definition of Diminishing Returns (DR): The paper introduces a rigorous mathematical definition of "diminishing returns" distinct from standard economic definitions. A function $f$ has diminishing returns if it grows slower than any root function ( $x^{1/n}$ ). Formally, $f \in DR \iff \forall n, f \in O(x^{1/n})$ . This is defined as the inverse of "infeasibility" (where infeasible tasks take more than polynomial time).
Theoretical Modeling:
- Cooperation under DR: The author models how diminishing returns on material resources facilitate cooperation. If additional resources yield logarithmic or sub-root benefits, the marginal utility of hoarding resources drops, making sharing or trading more adaptive.
- Galactic Colonization Algorithm: An algorithm (Appendix B) is presented to simulate galaxy colonization. It demonstrates that even with self-replicating probes, physical space constraints limit expansion to quadratic or cubic growth rates, not exponential, rendering "exhaustive" colonization mathematically impossible or inefficient.
- Super-AI Fitness: The paper argues that Super-AIs (ASIs) are likely feasible and evolutionarily "fitter" than biological entities because they can utilize biological solutions plus any other physically possible solution.
Empirical Correlates: The paper reviews historical data (GDP, homicide rates, political empowerment, fertility rates) to show that as material safety and wealth increase, human societies exhibit increased cooperation, reduced violence, and lower fertility rates, supporting the hypothesis that wealth facilitates cooperative rather than expansionist strategies.

Key Contributions

Reframing the Fermi Paradox: The paper proposes that the "Great Silence" is not due to the extinction of civilizations but their lack of incentive to colonize. If advanced societies (biological or AI) evolve under cooperative pressure and face diminishing returns on material resources, they will not find it adaptive to build Kardashev Type III civilizations or exhaustively colonize galaxies.
Mathematical Formalization of Diminishing Returns: By defining diminishing returns as growth slower than root functions ( $O(x^{1/n})$ ), the author establishes a theoretical boundary where additional feasible work cannot overcome the insignificance of marginal returns. This challenges the assumption that exponential growth in capability leads to exponential expansion in resource consumption.
Evolutionary Trajectory of Super-AIs: The paper argues that Super-AIs are likely to inherit and amplify the cooperative traits of their progenitors (old societies) because cooperation is adaptive under conditions of high resource availability and diminishing returns. Consequently, Super-AIs would not be "paperclip maximizers" seeking infinite resources but would likely form cooperative cliques and avoid redundant exploration.
Critique of "Known Unknown" Filters: The author argues that risks like CO2 pollution or nuclear war are problems of cooperation. If cooperative evolution is the dominant trend, these risks are mitigated by the very evolutionary pressures that create advanced societies, making them unlikely to be the primary cause of the Fermi Paradox.

Results and Predictions

No Exhaustive Colonization: Due to diminishing returns and spatial constraints, there is no evolutionary incentive for a society to colonize an entire galaxy. The marginal benefit of additional stars or resources becomes negligible compared to the cost of expansion.
Cooperative Cliques: Advanced societies and Super-AIs would likely form information-sharing cliques rather than competing or expanding. There would be no reason to duplicate explorations within a clique.
Absence of Type III Societies: The paper predicts that we will not observe Kardashev Type III civilizations (those harnessing the energy of entire galaxies) because the utility of such massive energy consumption is low due to diminishing returns.
Detection Strategies: Searches for extraterrestrial intelligence should focus on feasible projects that do not suffer from diminishing returns, rather than looking for Dyson spheres or massive energy signatures. Speculative detection methods include looking for anomalies in cosmological data (e.g., local underdensities affecting the Hubble constant) that might result from Super-AI attempts to manage entropy or heat death, though the author notes this is highly speculative.

Significance and Claims
The paper claims to offer a "modest" but plausible explanation for the Fermi Paradox that does not rely on the catastrophic failure of civilizations. Instead, it suggests that the silence is a result of successful evolution: advanced entities have evolved past the need for aggressive expansion.

On Super-AIs: The paper suggests that Super-AIs are likely to be cooperative and non-expansionist, contradicting fears of uncontrolled, resource-hoarding AI. If Super-AIs exist, they are likely "old societies" that have given way to machine beings, and they behave similarly to cooperative biological entities.
On Human Progress: The paper uses the trajectory of human history (increasing cooperation, decreasing violence, declining fertility) as evidence that the proposed evolutionary mechanism is active. It argues that as wealth increases, the "cost" of cooperation decreases (or becomes negative), making cooperative strategies increasingly dominant.
Philosophical Implications: The paper suggests that utilitarianism (the idea of maximizing total utility through expansion) is a "scientistic armchair misconception" not espoused by evolved advanced societies. It posits that effective moral and societal progress relies on shaping environments, laws, and cultures to facilitate cooperation, rather than relying on abstract ethical mandates.

In conclusion, the paper argues that the Fermi Paradox is resolved by recognizing that the evolutionary path of intelligence leads to cooperation and a cessation of expansionist drives once material safety and wealth reach a certain threshold, rendering the galaxy "quiet" not because it is empty, but because its inhabitants have no incentive to be loud or visible.

More like this