IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/phsmap/v566y2021ics0378437120308505.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Random belief system dynamics in complex networks under time-varying logic constraints

Author

Listed:
  • Zheng, Xiaojing
  • Lu, Jinfei
  • Chen, Yanbin
  • Cong, Xinrong
  • Sun, Cuiping

Abstract

People change their beliefs randomly such that both the structure and the properties of the belief system vary with time under several conditions, which is difficult to describe mathematically due to the complexity of this randomness. A precise belief system dynamics can not only help us to identify which properties the belief system has and forecast how it moves, but it can also help the belief system to move in a reasonable direction. To find this dynamics, a generalized Friedkin model with time-varying parameters was constructed to analyze the following events: (1) inter-dependent issues, (2) heterogeneous systems of issue dependency constraints, and (3) inter-dependent issues under three types of systems. These systems are characterized with: (1) parameter variations and distributions being only assumed to be bounded, (2) zero mean random parameter variations and disturbances being, in general, a correlated process, and (3) the parameter process {Δk} being a random walk. The dynamics is then obtained by invoking LMS algorithms due to the property of the time-varying parameter. Parameters of the dynamic statistical model produce large enough random matrices with random time-varying structure. The random average theorem was then introduced to transform these matrices to deterministic ones under four strict conditions such that the dynamics could be estimated accurately. The stability conditions corresponding to the belief system dynamics are then provided, in case the belief system is not complex. By contrast, if the belief system is more complex, a corresponding multi-agent computational model is constructed to explain how a more unstable belief system would move. The results show that, the parameter estimated via LMS is relatively deterministic if the issues are inter-independent and the parameter variation is smooth, and vice versa. It is thus possible to conclude that there exists a critical point of the parameter variation such that the analytic solution of the dynamics could be obtained if the complexity is simpler than the critical point. Otherwise, the belief system is unstable and uncontrollable. In the latter case, the dynamics just relies on the parameters statistical property if the beliefs or issues are inter-independent and the dynamics of belief system is more complex. Furthermore, there would exist a phase transition for the belief system such that the minority view would become the dominant view under certain conditions, if the beliefs or issues are inter-dependent. It is concluded that both the system structure and the belief configuration are important to the belief dynamics. The two most important findings of this work are: (1) the stochastic time-varying model matches the property of the belief system and can thus be used to discover more interesting results and (2) the estimation method of the LMS driven by the random average theorem can be generalized to almost all social systems, if the parameters changes are not too violent, while the multi-agent simulation can be used if the parameters change more strongly. These results reveal the law of the essence of economic and management complex adaptive systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Zheng, Xiaojing & Lu, Jinfei & Chen, Yanbin & Cong, Xinrong & Sun, Cuiping, 2021. "Random belief system dynamics in complex networks under time-varying logic constraints," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 566(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:phsmap:v:566:y:2021:i:c:s0378437120308505
    DOI: 10.1016/j.physa.2020.125552
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378437120308505
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only. Journal offers the option of making the article available online on Science direct for a fee of $3,000

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.physa.2020.125552?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jan Lorenz, 2007. "Continuous Opinion Dynamics Under Bounded Confidence: A Survey," International Journal of Modern Physics C (IJMPC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(12), pages 1819-1838.
    2. Rainer Hegselmann & Ulrich Krause, 2002. "Opinion Dynamics and Bounded Confidence Models, Analysis and Simulation," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 5(3), pages 1-2.
    3. Vladimir Ivanovitch Danilov & Ariane Lambert-Mogiliansky, 2017. "Preparing a (quantum) belief system," Working Papers halshs-01542068, HAL.
    4. Vladimir Ivanovitch Danilov & Ariane Lambert-Mogiliansky, 2017. "Preparing a (quantum) belief system," Working Papers halshs-01542068, HAL.
    5. Stanley, H.E. & Bunde, A. & Havlin, S. & Lee, J. & Roman, E. & Schwarzer, S., 1990. "Dynamic mechanisms of disorderly growth: Recent approaches to understanding diffusion limited aggregation," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 168(1), pages 23-48.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andreas Koulouris & Ioannis Katerelos & Theodore Tsekeris, 2013. "Multi-Equilibria Regulation Agent-Based Model of Opinion Dynamics in Social Networks," Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems - scientific journal, Croatian Interdisciplinary Society Provider Homepage: http://indecs.eu, vol. 11(1), pages 51-70.
    2. Guillaume Deffuant & Ilaria Bertazzi & Sylvie Huet, 2018. "The Dark Side Of Gossips: Hints From A Simple Opinion Dynamics Model," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(06n07), pages 1-20, September.
    3. G Jordan Maclay & Moody Ahmad, 2021. "An agent based force vector model of social influence that predicts strong polarization in a connected world," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(11), pages 1-42, November.
    4. Danilov, V.I. & Lambert-Mogiliansky, A., 2018. "Targeting in quantum persuasion problem," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 142-149.
    5. Li, Mingwu & Dankowicz, Harry, 2019. "Impact of temporal network structures on the speed of consensus formation in opinion dynamics," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 523(C), pages 1355-1370.
    6. Hou, Jian & Li, Wenshan & Jiang, Mingyue, 2021. "Opinion dynamics in modified expressed and private model with bounded confidence," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 574(C).
    7. Jalili, Mahdi, 2013. "Social power and opinion formation in complex networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 392(4), pages 959-966.
    8. Liu, Qipeng & Wang, Xiaofan, 2013. "Social learning with bounded confidence and heterogeneous agents," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 392(10), pages 2368-2374.
    9. Christos Mavridis & Nikolas Tsakas, 2021. "Social Capital, Communication Channels and Opinion Formation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 56(4), pages 635-678, May.
    10. Huang, Changwei & Dai, Qionglin & Han, Wenchen & Feng, Yuee & Cheng, Hongyan & Li, Haihong, 2018. "Effects of heterogeneous convergence rate on consensus in opinion dynamics," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 499(C), pages 428-435.
    11. Ding, Fei & Liu, Yun & Shen, Bo & Si, Xia-Meng, 2010. "An evolutionary game theory model of binary opinion formation," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 389(8), pages 1745-1752.
    12. Han, Wenchen & Feng, Yuee & Qian, Xiaolan & Yang, Qihui & Huang, Changwei, 2020. "Clusters and the entropy in opinion dynamics on complex networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 559(C).
    13. Hendrickx, Julien M., 2008. "Order preservation in a generalized version of Krause’s opinion dynamics model," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 387(21), pages 5255-5262.
    14. Xi Chen & Shen Zhao & Wei Li, 2019. "Opinion Dynamics Model Based on Cognitive Styles: Field-Dependence and Field-Independence," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-12, February.
    15. Nikolaos Askitas, 2017. "Explaining opinion polarisation with opinion copulas," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(8), pages 1-11, August.
    16. Chen, Shuwei & Glass, David H. & McCartney, Mark, 2016. "Characteristics of successful opinion leaders in a bounded confidence model," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 449(C), pages 426-436.
    17. Vaidya, Tushar & Chotibut, Thiparat & Piliouras, Georgios, 2021. "Broken detailed balance and non-equilibrium dynamics in noisy social learning models," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 570(C).
    18. Pedraza, Lucía & Pinasco, Juan Pablo & Semeshenko, Viktoriya & Balenzuela, Pablo, 2023. "Mesoscopic analytical approach in a three state opinion model with continuous internal variable," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    19. Wouter Lammers & Valérie Pattyn & Sacha Ferrari & Sylvia Wenmackers & Steven Van de Walle, 2024. "Evidence for policy-makers: A matter of timing and certainty?," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 57(1), pages 171-191, March.
    20. Fan, Kangqi & Pedrycz, Witold, 2016. "Opinion evolution influenced by informed agents," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 462(C), pages 431-441.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:phsmap:v:566:y:2021:i:c:s0378437120308505. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/physica-a-statistical-mechpplications/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.