Transition from simple to complex contagion in collective decision-making
Bibliographic record
Abstract
How does the spread of behavior affect consensus-based collective decision-making among animals, humans or swarming robots? In prior research, such propagation of behavior on social networks has been found to exhibit a transition from simple contagion-i.e, based on pairwise interactions-to a complex one-i.e., involving social influence and reinforcement. However, this rich phenomenology appears so far limited to threshold-based decision-making processes with binary options. Here, we show theoretically, and experimentally with a multi-robot system, that such a transition from simple to complex contagion can also bed observed in an archetypal model of distributed decision-making devoid of any thresholds or nonlinearities. Specifically, we uncover two key results: the nature of the contagion-simple or complex-is tightly related to the intrinsic pace of the behavior that is spreading, and the network topology strongly influences the effectiveness of the behavioral transmission in ways that are reminiscent of threshold-based models. These results offer new directions for the empirical exploration of behavioral contagions in groups, and have significant ramifications for the design of cooperative and networked robot systems.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".