Quantum dynamical modeling of competition and cooperation between political parties: The coalition and non-coalition equilibrium model

Abstract We propose a model of parties’ dynamical decision-making related to becoming a member of a coalition or pursuing a competitive strategy. Our approach is based on the mathematical formalism of quantum information theory. The devised model has no direct relation to quantum physics, only its mathematical apparatus and methodology are applied, in particular the quantum probability and the theory of open quantum systems. The latter describes the most general form of adaptive dynamics of a system interacting with an environment. In our model the environment is composed of the electorate, or more specifically the informational bath generated by the parties’ electorate, which is a key part of the socio-economic context surrounding the political party as a decision-making entity. The key feature of the quantum model is the ability to capture the strong interrelation of the parties’ decision making states, through the notion of entanglement. The preferences of different parties evolve simultaneously and non-separably in the joint information space. We model the approaching of the state of political equilibrium by using the Markov approximation of the quantum master equation. Illustrative examples of numerical simulations are presented to specify, how the model works operationally.

[1]  Emmanuel Haven,et al.  Instability of political preferences and the role of mass media: a dynamical representation in a quantum framework , 2016, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[2]  Fabio Bagarello,et al.  Quantum Dynamics for Classical Systems: With Applications of the Number Operator , 2012 .

[3]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  Quantum Entanglement and the Issue of Selective Influences in Psychology: An Overview , 2012, QI.

[4]  Charles E. Smith,et al.  Pseudo-classical Nonseparability and Mass Politics in Two-Party Systems , 2011, QI.

[5]  Patrick Suppes,et al.  Quantum mechanics, interference, and the brain , 2009 .

[6]  Michael F. Meffert,et al.  Strategic coalition voting: evidence from Austria , 2010 .

[7]  A. Khrennikov,et al.  Quantum Social Science , 2013 .

[8]  A. Tversky,et al.  Thinking through uncertainty: Nonconsequential reasoning and choice , 1992, Cognitive Psychology.

[9]  Peter C. Fishburn,et al.  Coalition voting , 1992 .

[10]  Yoshiharu Tanaka,et al.  Quantum-like model of brain's functioning: decision making from decoherence. , 2011, Journal of theoretical biology.

[11]  G. Jaeger,et al.  Quantum Information: An Overview , 2006 .

[12]  Masanori Ohya,et al.  Non-Kolmogorovian Approach to the Context-Dependent Systems Breaking the Classical Probability Law , 2013 .

[13]  A. Downs An Economic Theory of Democracy , 1957 .

[14]  Emerson M. S. Niou,et al.  A Problem with Referendums , 2000 .

[15]  Polina Khrennikova Order effect in a study on US voters’ preferences: quantum framework representation of the observables , 2014 .

[16]  M. Ohya,et al.  Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Information and Computation and Its Applications to Nano- and Bio-systems , 2011 .

[17]  William H. Flanigan,et al.  The Theory of Political Coalitions. , 1965 .

[18]  J. Busemeyer,et al.  A quantum probability explanation for violations of ‘rational’ decision theory , 2009, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[19]  Jerome R. Busemeyer,et al.  Quantum Type Indeterminacy in Dynamic Decision-Making: Self-Control through Identity Management , 2012, Games.

[20]  R. Feynman,et al.  Quantum Mechanics and Path Integrals , 1965 .

[21]  M. Born Zur Quantenmechanik der Stoßvorgänge , 1926 .

[22]  Joseph Greenberg,et al.  Chapter 37 Coalition structures , 1994 .

[23]  Marian Grabowski,et al.  Operational Quantum Physics , 2001 .

[24]  D. Finke Estimating the Effect of Nonseparable Preferences in Eu Treaty Negotiations , 2009 .

[25]  Chin-hsing Chen,et al.  The Fibonacci search for cornerpoint detection of two-dimensional images , 1992 .

[26]  Dean Lacy,et al.  A Theory of Nonseparable Preferences in Survey Responses , 2001 .

[27]  Fabio Bagarello,et al.  A Quantum-Like View to a Generalized Two Players Game , 2015, 1503.00903.

[28]  Amrita Dhillon,et al.  Political Parties and Coalition Formation , 2004 .

[29]  M. Hinich,et al.  An Expository Development of a Mathematical Model of the Electoral Process , 1970, American Political Science Review.

[30]  Emmanuel Haven,et al.  An Application of the Theory of Open Quantum Systems to Model the Dynamics of Party Governance in the US Political System , 2014 .

[31]  W. Zurek Decoherence, einselection, and the quantum origins of the classical , 2001, quant-ph/0105127.

[32]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  All-Possible-Couplings Approach to Measuring Probabilistic Context , 2012, PloS one.

[33]  James T. Townsend,et al.  Quantum dynamics of human decision-making , 2006 .

[34]  Jerome R. Busemeyer,et al.  Quantum Models of Cognition and Decision , 2012 .

[35]  Kaare W. Strøm,et al.  A Behavioral Theory of Competitive Political Parties , 1990 .

[36]  James M. Enelow,et al.  The Spatial Theory of Voting: An Introduction , 1984 .

[37]  Yoshiharu Tanaka,et al.  Violation of contextual generalization of the Leggett–Garg inequality for recognition of ambiguous figures , 2014, 1401.2897.

[38]  Yoshiharu Tanaka,et al.  Quantum-like dynamics of decision-making , 2012 .

[39]  A. Tversky,et al.  The Disjunction Effect in Choice under Uncertainty , 1992 .

[40]  J. Bell,et al.  Speakable and Unspeakable in Quatum Mechanics , 1988 .

[41]  Fabio Bagarello,et al.  An Operator View on Alliances in Politics , 2015, SIAM J. Appl. Math..

[42]  D. Finke,et al.  The merits of adding complexity: non-separable preferences in spatial models of European Union politics , 2013 .

[43]  Jerome R. Busemeyer,et al.  A Quantum Question Order Model Supported by Empirical Tests of an A Priori and Precise Prediction , 2013, Top. Cogn. Sci..