Threshold q-voter model

We introduce the threshold q-voter opinion dynamics where an agent, facing a binary choice, can change its mind when at least q_{0} among q neighbors share the opposite opinion. Otherwise, the agent can still change its mind with a certain probability ɛ. This threshold dynamics contemplates the possibility of persuasion by an influence group even when there is not full agreement among its members. In fact, individuals can follow their peers not only when there is unanimity (q_{0}=q) in the lobby group, as assumed in the q-voter model, but also, depending on the circumstances, when there is simple majority (q_{0}>q/2), Byzantine consensus (q_{0}>2q/3), or any minimal number q_{0} among q. This realistic threshold gives place to emerging collective states and phase transitions which are not observed in the standard q voter. The threshold q_{0}, together with the stochasticity introduced by ɛ, yields a phenomenology that mimics as particular cases the q voter with stochastic drivings such as nonconformity and independence. In particular, nonconsensus majority states are possible, as well as mixed phases. Continuous and discontinuous phase transitions can occur, but also transitions from fluctuating phases into absorbing states.

[1]  Katarzyna Sznajd-Weron,et al.  Mapping the q-voter model: From a single chain to complex networks , 2015, 1501.05091.

[2]  André M Timpanaro,et al.  Exit probability of the one-dimensional q-voter model: analytical results and simulations for large networks. , 2013, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[3]  C. Gardiner.  Handbook of Stochastic Methods , 1983 .

[4]  Tsuyoshi Murata,et al.  {m , 1934, ACML.

[5]  Maxi San Miguel,et al.  Fragmentation transitions in a coevolving nonlinear voter model , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[6]  S. Redner,et al.  Dynamics of majority rule in two-state interacting spin systems. , 2003, Physical review letters.

[7]  Guillaume Deffuant,et al.  Mixing beliefs among interacting agents , 2000, Adv. Complex Syst..

[8]  Katarzyna Sznajd-Weron,et al.  Opinion evolution in closed community , 2000, cond-mat/0101130.

[9]  Daichi Kimura,et al.  Coevolutionary networks with homophily and heterophily. , 2008, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[10]  Celia Anteneodo,et al.  Role of conviction in non-equilibrium models of opinion formation , 2012, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[11]  Ericka Stricklin-Parker,et al.  Ann , 2005 .

[12]  Shlomo Havlin,et al.  Dynamic opinion model and invasion percolation. , 2009, Physical review letters.

[13]  Soumyajyoti Biswas,et al.  Disorder induced phase transition in kinetic models of opinion dynamics , 2011, 1102.0902.

[14]  K. Pearson,et al.  Biometrika , 1902, The American Naturalist.

[15]  P. Clifford,et al.  A model for spatial conflict , 1973 .

[16]  T. Gross,et al.  Moment-Closure Approximations for Discrete Adaptive Networks , 2012, 1211.0449.

[17]  S. Fortunato,et al.  Statistical physics of social dynamics , 2007, 0710.3256.

[19]  Maxi San Miguel,et al.  Generic absorbing transition in coevolution dynamics. , 2007, Physical review letters.

[20]  F. Vazquez,et al.  Analytical solution of the voter model on uncorrelated networks , 2008, 0803.1686.

[21]  Alain Barrat,et al.  Who's talking first? Consensus or lack thereof in coevolving opinion formation models. , 2007, Physical review letters.

[22]  Katarzyna Sznajd-Weron,et al.  Exit probability in a one-dimensional nonlinear q-voter model. , 2011, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[23]  S. Redner,et al.  Voter model on heterogeneous graphs. , 2004, Physical review letters.

[24]  Shlomo Havlin,et al.  How does public opinion become extreme? , 2014, Scientific Reports.

[25]  S. Galam.  Sociophysics: A Physicist's Modeling of Psycho-political Phenomena , 2012 .

[26]  W. Marsden.  I and J , 2012 .

[27]  Romualdo Pastor-Satorras,et al.  Mean-Field Analysis of the q-Voter Model on Networks , 2013, 1301.7563.

[28]  Katarzyna Sznajd-Weron,et al.  Phase transitions in the q-voter model with two types of stochastic driving. , 2012, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[29]  Celia Anteneodo,et al.  Consequences of nonconformist behaviors in a continuous opinion model , 2016, ArXiv.

[30]  Matthew J. Salganik,et al.  Web-Based Experiments for the Study of Collective Social Dynamics in Cultural Markets , 2009, Top. Cogn. Sci..

[31]  Katarzyna Sznajd-Weron,et al.  Phase transitions in the q-voter model with noise on a duplex clique. , 2015, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[32]  S. Redner,et al.  Voter models on heterogeneous networks. , 2007, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[33]  Katarzyna Sznajd-Weron,et al.  A nonlinear q-voter model with deadlocks on the Watts–Strogatz graph , 2014, ArXiv.

[34]  S. Galam.  Rational group decision making: A random field Ising model at T = 0 , 1997, cond-mat/9702163.

[35]  V. Latora,et al.  Complex networks: Structure and dynamics , 2006 .

[36]  Bikas K. Chakrabarti,et al.  Sociophysics: An Introduction , 2014 .

[37]  Serge Gallam.  Majority rule, hierarchical structures, and democratic totalitarianism: a statistical approach , 1986 .

[38]  Marco Alberto Javarone,et al.  Conformism-driven phases of opinion formation on heterogeneous networks: the q-voter model case , 2014, 1410.7300.

[39]  Boleslaw K. Szymanski,et al.  Threshold-limited spreading in social networks with multiple initiators , 2013, Scientific Reports.

[40]  S. Galam.  Minority opinion spreading in random geometry , 2002, cond-mat/0203553.

[41]  Celia Anteneodo,et al.  Role of the plurality rule in multiple choices , 2016, 1606.04083.

[42]  S. Redner,et al.  Consensus formation in multi-state majority and plurality models , 2005 .

[43]  Wayne D. Gray.  Topics in cognitive science : journal of the Cognitive Science Society , 2009 .

[44]  Arkadiusz Jędrzejewski,et al.  Pair approximation for the q-voter model with independence on complex networks. , 2017, Physical review. E.

[45]  M. Newman,et al.  Nonequilibrium phase transition in the coevolution of networks and opinions. , 2006, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[46]  Celia Anteneodo,et al.  Impact of contrarians and intransigents in a kinetic model of opinion dynamics , 2014, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[47]  Mauro Mobilia,et al.  Nonlinear $q$-voter model with inflexible zealots , 2015, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[48]  K. Sznajd-Weron,et al.  Anticonformity or Independence?—Insights from Statistical Physics , 2013 .

[49]  R. Holley,et al.  Ergodic Theorems for Weakly Interacting Infinite Systems and the Voter Model , 1975 .

[50]  G. G. Stokes.  "J." , 1890, The New Yale Book of Quotations.

[51]  André M Timpanaro,et al.  Analytical expression for the exit probability of the q-voter model in one dimension. , 2014, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.