Binary Opinion Dynamics with Biased Agents and Agents with Different Degrees of Stubbornness.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we investigate the impact of random interactions between agents in a social network on the diffusion of opinions in the network. Opinion of each agent is assumed to be a binary variable and each agent is assumed to be able to interact with any other agent in the network. This models scenarios where every agent in the network has to choose from two available options and the size of the neighborhood of each agent is an increasing function of the total number agents in the network. It is assumed that each agent updates its opinion at random instants upon interacting with other randomly sampled agents. We consider two simple rules of interaction: (1) the voter rule in which the updating agent simply copies the opinion of another randomly sampled agent, (2) the majority rule, in which the updating agent samples multiple agents and adopts the majority opinion among the sampled agents and the agent itself. Under each rule, we consider two different scenarios which have not been considered in the literature thus far: (1) where the agents are 'biased' towards one of the opinions, (2) where different agents have different degrees of stubbornness. We show that the presence of biased agents reduces the consensus time for the voter rule exponentially as compared to the case where the agents are unbiased. For the majority rule model with biased agents, we show that the network reaches consensus on a particular opinion with high probability only when the initial fraction of agents having that opinion is above a certain threshold. For the majority rule model with stubborn agents, we observe metastability where the network switches back and forth between stable states spending long intervals in each state.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".