logo

SCIENTIA SINICA Informationis, Volume 48, Issue 1: 3-23(2018) https://doi.org/10.1360/N112017-00096

Opinion dynamics in social networks

More info
  • ReceivedMay 9, 2017
  • AcceptedAug 25, 2017
  • PublishedJan 3, 2018

Abstract

In recent years, research in opinion dynamics has received a great amount of attention in the field of systems and control. Opinion dynamics studies the spreading of opinions and the evolution of behaviors in social networks by utilizing mathematical and physical models, the agent-based computational modeling tools and dynamical systems theories. Here, we review recent advances in the study of opinion dynamics. First, the fundamental model and some concepts are introduced. Second, opinion dynamics models are presented combined with related results of multi-agent systems from three aspects: individuals, interactions, and decision-makings. Some interesting issues are also discussed. Finally, future directions of the research are pointed out.


Funded by

国家自然科学基金(61533001)


References

[1] Lewes G H. Problems of Life and Mind. London: Tr$\ddot{\text{u}}$bner & Company, 1877. Google Scholar

[2] Waldrop M M. Complexity: the Emerging Science at the Edge of Order and Chaos. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1993. Google Scholar

[3] Holland J H. Emergence: From Chaos to Order. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998. Google Scholar

[4] Corning P A. The re-emergence of “emergence: a venerable concept in search of a theory. Complexity, 2002, 7: 18--30. Google Scholar

[5] Qian X S, Yu J Y, Dai R W. A new discipline of science — the study of open complex giant system and its methodology. Chin J Nat, 1990, 13: 3--10. Google Scholar

[6] Guo L. What is systematology. J Syst Sci Math Sci, 2016, 36: 291--301. Google Scholar

[7] Moreno J L. Sociometry, Experimental Method and the Science of Society. Oxford: Beacon House, 1951. Google Scholar

[8] Diani M, McAdam D. Social Movements and Networks. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. Google Scholar

[9] Wiener N. Cybernetics. Paris: Hermann, 1948. Google Scholar

[10] Wiener N. The Human Use of Human Beings: Cybernetics and Society. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1950. Google Scholar

[11] Janowitz M. Sociological theory and social control. Am J Sociol, 1975, 81: 82--108. Google Scholar

[12] Geyer F. The challenge of sociocybernetics. Kybernetes, 1995, 24: 6--32. Google Scholar

[13] Cheng D Z, Chen H F. From swarm to social behavior control. Sci Technol Rev, 2004, 22: 4--7. Google Scholar

[14] Qian X S, Song J. Engineering Cybernetics. Beijing: Science Press, 1983. Google Scholar

[15] Zheng D Z. The development and enlightenment of control science. Stud Dial Nat, 1986, 2: 57--62. Google Scholar

[16] Zheng D Z, Zheng Y P. The current state and developing trends of DEDS theory. Acta Autom Sin, 1992, 18: 131--142. Google Scholar

[17] Wang L, Shi H, Chu T G, et al. Aggregation of foraging swarms. In: Proceedings of Australasian Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Cairns, 2004. 766--777. Google Scholar

[18] Wang L, Fu F, Chen X J, et al. Evolutionary games and self-organizing cooperation. J Syst Sci Math Sci, 2007, 27: 330--343. Google Scholar

[19] Chen X J, Wang L. Cooperation enhanced by moderate tolerance ranges in myopically selective interactions. Phys Rev E, 2009, 80: 046109. Google Scholar

[20] Wu B, Fu F, Wang L. Imperfect vaccine aggravates the long-standing dilemma of voluntary vaccination. PLoS ONE, 2011, 6: 20577. Google Scholar

[21] Cheng D Z, Zhao Y, Xu T T. Dynamic games and optimal control of logical dynamic systems. J Syst Sci Math Sci, 2012, 32: 1226--1238. Google Scholar

[22] Wang L, Cong R, Li K. Feedback mechanism in cooperation evolving. Sci Sin Inform, 2014, 44: 1495--1514. Google Scholar

[23] Jadbabaie A, Lin J, Morse A S. Coordination of groups of mobile autonomous agents using neaest neighbor rules. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2003, 48: 988--1001. Google Scholar

[24] Olfati-Saber R, Murray R M. Consensus problems in networks of agents with switching topology and time-delays. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2004, 49: 1520--1533. Google Scholar

[25] Ren W, Beard R W. Consensus seeking in multiagent systems under dynamically changing interaction topologies. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2005, 50: 655--661. Google Scholar

[26] Xiao F. Consensus problems in networks of multiple autonomous agents. Dissertation for Ph.D. Degree. Beijng: Peking University, 2008. Google Scholar

[27] Wang L, Jiang F C, Xie G M, et al. Controllability of multi-agent systems based on agreement protocols. Sci China Ser F-Inf Sci, 2009, 52: 2074--2088. Google Scholar

[28] Wang L, Du J M. Evolutionary game theoretic coordinated control of multi-agent systems. J Syst Sci Math Sci, 2016, 36: 302--318. Google Scholar

[29] Qin J H, Ma Q C, Shi Y, et al. Recent advances in consensus of multi-agent systems: a brief survey. IEEE Trans Ind Electron, 2017, 64: 4972--4983. Google Scholar

[30] Wu C W. Synchronization in Complex Networks of Nonlinear Dynamical Systems. Singapore: World Scientific, 2007. Google Scholar

[31] Wang L, Fu F, Chen X J, et al. Evolutionary games on complex networks. CAAI Trans Intell Syst, 2007, 2: 1--10. Google Scholar

[32] Wang L, Fu F, Chen X J, et al. Collective decision-making over complex networks. CAAI Trans Intell Syst, 2008, 3: 95--108. Google Scholar

[33] Han X, Cao S N, Shen Z S, et al. Emergence of communities and diversity in social networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci, 2017, 114: 2887--2891. Google Scholar

[34] Su Q, Li A M, Zhou L, et al. Interactive diversity promotes the evolution of cooperation in structured populations. New J Phys, 2016, 18: 103007. Google Scholar

[35] Godsil C, Royal G. Algebraic Graph Theory. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2001. Google Scholar

[36] Zheng D Z. Linear System Theory. 2nd ed. Beijing: Tsinghua University Press, 2002. Google Scholar

[37] Proskurnikov A V, Tempo R. A tutorial on modeling and analysis of dynamic social networks. Part I. Annu Rev Control, 2017, 43: 65--79. Google Scholar

[38] Castellano C, Fortunato S, Loreto V. Statistical physics of social dynamics. Rev Mod Phys, 2009, 81: 591--646. Google Scholar

[39] Schneider J J, Hirtreiter C. The impact of election results on the member numbers of the large parties in Bavaria and Germany. Int J Mod Phys C, 2005, 16: 1165--1215. Google Scholar

[40] Araripe L E, Costa Filho R N, Herrmann H J, et al. Plurality voting: the statistical laws of democracy in Brazil. Int J Mod Phys C, 2006, 17: 1809--1813. Google Scholar

[41] Degroot M H. Reaching a consensus. J Am Stat Assoc, 1974, 69: 118--121. Google Scholar

[42] Friedkin N E, Johnsen E C. Social influence networks and opinion change. Adv Group Process, 1999, 16: 1--29. Google Scholar

[43] Frasca P, Ishii H, Ravazzi C, et al. Distributed randomized algorithms for opinion formation, centrality computation and power systems estimation: a tutorial overview. Eur J Control, 2015, 24: 2--13. Google Scholar

[44] Friedkin N E, Proskurnikov A V, Tempo R, et al. Network science on belief system dynamics under logic constraints. Science, 2016, 354: 321--326. Google Scholar

[45] Minsky M. The Society of Mind. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1986. Google Scholar

[46] Karlin S, Taylor M H. A First Course in Stochastic Processes. New York: Academic Press, 1975. Google Scholar

[47] Golub B, Jackson M O. Naive learning in social networks and the wisdom of crowds. Am Econ J Microeconomics, 2010, 2: 112--149. Google Scholar

[48] Horn R A, Johnson C R. Matrix Analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012. Google Scholar

[49] Meyer C D. Matrix Analysis and Applied Linear Algebra. Philadelphia: SIAM, 2000. Google Scholar

[50] Xiao F, Wang L. Asynchronous consensus in continuous-time multi-agent systems with switching topology and time-varying delays. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2008, 53: 1804--1816. Google Scholar

[51] Xiao F. A new approach to consensus problems in discrete-time multiagent systems with time-delays. Sci China Ser F-Inf Sci, 2007, 50: 625--635. Google Scholar

[52] Wang L, Xiao F. Finite-time consensus problems for networks of dynamic agents. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2010, 55: 950--955. Google Scholar

[53] Liu H Y, Xie G M, Wang L. Necessary and sufficient conditions for containment control of networked multi-agent systems. Automatica, 2012, 48: 1415--1422. Google Scholar

[54] Ma J Y, Zheng Y S, Wang L. Topology selection for multi-agent systems with opposite leaders. Syst Control Lett, 2016, 93: 43--49. Google Scholar

[55] Guan Y Q, Ji Z J, Zhang L, et al. Controllability of multi-agent systems under directed topology. Int J Robust Nonlinear Control, 2017, 27: 4333--4347. Google Scholar

[56] Guan Y Q, Wang L. Structural controllability of multi-agent systems with absolute protocol under fixed and switching topologies. Sci China Inf Sci, 2017, 60: 092203. Google Scholar

[57] Altafini C. Consensus problems on networks with antagonistic interactions. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2013, 58: 935--946. Google Scholar

[58] Boyd S, Ghosh A, Prabhakar B, et al. Randomized gossip algorithms. IEEE Trans Inform Theory, 2006, 52: 2508--2530. Google Scholar

[59] Acemoglu D, Ozdaglar A, ParandehGheibi A. Spread of (mis) information in social networks. Games Econ Behav, 2010, 70: 194--227. Google Scholar

[60] Li L, Scaglione A, Swami A, et al. Consensus, polarization and clustering of opinions in social networks. IEEE J Sel Area Commun, 2013, 31: 1072--1083. Google Scholar

[61] Tian Y, Wang L. Opinion dyanmics in social networks with stubborn agents: an issue-based perspective. 2017,. arXiv Google Scholar

[62] Ghaderi J, Srikant R. Opinion dynamics in social networks with stubborn agents: equilibrium and convergence rate. Automatica, 2014, 50: 3209--3215. Google Scholar

[63] Horowitz I L. Consensus, conflict and cooperation: a sociological inventory. Soc Forces, 1962, 41: 177--188. Google Scholar

[64] North D C. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Google Scholar

[65] Egidi M, Narduzzo A. The emergence of path-dependent behaviors in cooperative contexts. Int J Ind Organ, 1997, 15: 677--709. Google Scholar

[66] Tian Y, Jing G, Wang L. Opinion containment in social networks over issue sequences. In: Proceedings of the 13th IEEE Conference on Automation Science and Engineering, Xian, 2017. 1374--1379. Google Scholar

[67] Bindel D, Kleinberg J, Oren S. How bad is forming your own opinion? In: Proceedings of the 52nd Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, Palm Springs, 2011. 57--66. Google Scholar

[68] Monderer D, Shapley L S. Potential games. Games Econ Behav, 1996, 14: 124--143. Google Scholar

[69] Etesami S R, Bacsar T. Price of anarchy and an approximation algorithm for the binary-preference capacitated selfish replication game. Automatica, 2017, 76: 153--163. Google Scholar

[70] Friedkin N E. A formal theory of reflected appraisals in the evolution of power. Administrative Sci Quart, 2011, 56: 501--529. Google Scholar

[71] Mirtabatabaei A, Jia P, Friedkin N E, et al. On the reflected appraisals dynamics of influence networks with stubborn agents. In: Proceedings of American Control Conference, Portland, 2014. 3978--3983. Google Scholar

[72] Converse P. The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In: Ideology and Discontent. New York: Free Press, 1964. Google Scholar

[73] Parsegov S E, Proskurnikov A V, Tempo R, et al. Novel multidimensional models of opinion dynamics in social networks. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2017, 62: 2270--2285. Google Scholar

[74] Ravazzi C, Frasca P, Tempo R, et al. Ergodic randomized algorithms and dynamics over networks. IEEE Trans Control Netw Syst, 2015, 2: 78--87. Google Scholar

[75] Friedkin N E. The problem of social control and coordination of complex systems in sociology: a look at the community cleavage problem. IEEE Control Syst, 2015, 35: 40--51. Google Scholar

[76] Lamport L, Shostak R, Pease M. The Byzantine generals problem. ACM Trans Program Lang Syst, 1982, 4: 382--401. Google Scholar

[77] LeBlanc H J, Zhang H T, Sundaram S, et al. Consensus of multi-agent networks in the presence of adversaries using only local information. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on High Confidence Networked Systems, Beijing, 2012. 1--10. Google Scholar

[78] Wolfowitz J. Products of indecomposable, aperiodic, stochastic matrices. Proc Am Math Soc, 1963, 14: 733--736. Google Scholar

[79] Lorenz J. A stabilization theorem for dynamics of continuous opinions. Physica A, 2005, 355: 217--223. Google Scholar

[80] Touri B, Nedi$\acute{c}$ A. Product of random stochastic matrices. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2014, 59: 437--448. Google Scholar

[81] Touri B. Product of Random Stochastic Matrices and Distributed Averaging. Dordrecht: Springer Science & Business Media, 2012. Google Scholar

[82] Seneta E. Non-negative Matrices and Markov Chains. Dordrecht: Springer Science & Business Media, 2006. Google Scholar

[83] Hegselmann R, Krause U. Opinion dynamics and bounded confidence models, analysis, and simulation. J Artif Societies Soc Simula, 2002, 5: 1--24. Google Scholar

[84] Blondel V D, Hendrickx J M, Tsitsiklis J N. On the 2R conjecture for multi-agent systems. In: Proceedings of European Control Conference, Kos, 2007. 874--881. Google Scholar

[85] Blondel V D, Hendrickx J M, Tsitsiklis J N. On Krauses multi-agent consensus model with state-dependent connectivity. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2009, 54: 2586--2597. Google Scholar

[86] Etesami S R, Bacsar T, Nedi$\acute{c}$ A, et al. Termination time of multidimensional Hegselmann-Krause opinion dynamics. In: Proceedings of American Control Conference, Washington, 2013. 1255--1260. Google Scholar

[87] Touri B, Nedi$\acute{c}$ A. Discrete-time opinion dynamics. In: Proceedings of Conference Record of the 45th Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers, Pacific Grove, 2011. 1172--1176. Google Scholar

[88] Etesami S R, Bacsar T. Game-theoretic analysis of the Hegselmann-Krause model for opinion dynamics in finite dimensions. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2015, 60: 1886--1897. Google Scholar

[89] Chazelle B. The total s-energy of a multiagent system. SIAM J Control Optim, 2011, 49: 1680--1706. Google Scholar

[90] Chazelle B. Diffusive influence systems. SIAM J Comput, 2015, 44: 1403--1442. Google Scholar

[91] Chazelle B, Wang C. Inertial Hegselmann-Krause systems. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2017, 62: 3905--3913. Google Scholar

[92] Mirtabatabaei A, Bullo F. Opinion dynamics in heterogeneous networks: convergence conjectures and theorems. SIAM J Control Optim, 2012, 50: 2763--2785. Google Scholar

[93] Hegselmann R, Krause U. Truth and cognitive division of labor: first steps towards a computer aided social epistemology. J Artif Societies Soc Simula, 2006, 9: 9--10. Google Scholar

[94] Yang Y, Dimarogonas D V, Hu X. Opinion consensus of modified Hegselmann-Krause models. Automatica, 2014, 50: 622--627. Google Scholar

[95] Jing G S, Zheng Y S, Wang L. Consensus of multiagent systems with distance-dependent communication networks. IEEE Trans Neural Netw Learn Syst, 2017, 28: 2712--2726. Google Scholar

[96] Jia P, Mirtabatabaei A, Friedkin N E, et al. Opinion dynamics and the evolution of social power in influence networks. SIAM Rev, 2015, 57: 367--397. Google Scholar

[97] Xu Z, Liu J, Bacsar T. On a modified DeGroot-Friedkin model of opinion dynamics. In: Proceedings of American Control Conference, Chicago, 2015. 1047--1052. Google Scholar

[98] Xia W, Liu J, Johansson K H, et al. Convergence rate of the modified DeGroot-Friedkin model with doubly stochastic relative interaction matrices. In: Proceedings of American Control Conference, Boston, 2016. 1054--1059. Google Scholar

[99] Chen X D, Liu J, Belabbas M A, et al. Distributed evaluation and convergence of self-appraisals in social networks. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2017, 62: 291--304. Google Scholar

[100] Jia P, Friedkin N E, Bullo F. The coevolution of appraisal and influence networks leads to structural balance. IEEE Trans Netw Sci Eng, 2016, 3: 286--298. Google Scholar

[101] Fu F, Wang L. Coevolutionary dynamics of opinions and networks: from diversity to uniformity. Phys Rev E, 2008, 78: 016104. Google Scholar

[102] Wu T, Fu F, Wang L. Partner selections in public goods games with constant group size. Phys Rev E, 2009, 80: 026121. Google Scholar

[103] Wu T, Fu F, Zhang Y, et al. Expectation-driven migration promotes cooperation by group interactions. Phys Rev E, 2012, 85: 066104. Google Scholar

[104] Wang L, Wu T, Zhang Y L. Feedback mechanism in coevolutionary games. Control Theory Appl, 2014, 31: 823--836. Google Scholar

[105] Wu T, Wang L, Fu F. Coevolutionary dynamics of phenotypic diversity and contingent cooperation. PLoS Comput Biol, 2017, 13: 1005363. Google Scholar

[106] Cartwright D, Harary F. Structural balance: a generalization of Heiders theory. Psychol Rev, 1956, 63: 277--292. Google Scholar

[107] Meng D Y, Du M J, Jia Y M. Interval bipartite consensus of networked agents associated with signed digraphs. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2016, 61: 3755--3770. Google Scholar

[108] Proskurnikov A V, Matveev A S, Cao M. Opinion dynamics in social networks with hostile camps: consensus vs. polarization. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2016, 61: 1524--1536. Google Scholar

[109] Hatano Y, Mesbahi M. Agreement over random networks. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2005, 50: 1867--1872. Google Scholar

[110] Tahbaz-Salehi A, Jadbabaie A. A necessary and sufficient condition for consensus over random networks. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2008, 53: 791--795. Google Scholar

[111] Matei I, Baras J S, Somarakis C. Convergence results for the linear consensus problem under markovian random graphs. SIAM J Control Optim, 2013, 51: 1574--1591. Google Scholar

[112] Dandekar P, Goel A, Lee D T. Biased assimilation, homophily, and the dynamics of polarization. In: Proceedings of International Workshop on Internet and Network Economics, Cambridge, 2013. 5791--5796. Google Scholar

[113] Lord C G, Ross L, Lepper M R. Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: the effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. J Personality Soc Psychol, 1979, 37: 2098--2109. Google Scholar

[114] Sunstein C. Breaking up the echo. NY Times, 2012, A25. http://www.indiana.edu/~c228/BreakingUpTheEcho.pdf. Google Scholar

[115] Cheng D Z, Xu T T, Qi H S. Evolutionarily stable strategy of networked evolutionary games. IEEE Trans Neural Netw Learn Syst, 2014, 25: 1335--1345. Google Scholar

[116] Cheng D Z, He F H, Qi H S, et al. Modeling, analysis and control of networked evolutionary games. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2015, 60: 2402--2415. Google Scholar

[117] Ramazi P, Riehl J, Cao M. Networks of conforming or nonconforming individuals tend to reach satisfactory decisions. Proc Natl Acad Sci, 2016, 113: 12985--12990. Google Scholar

[118] Zheng Y P. Study on game theory and social complex systems. Syst Eng Theory Pract, 1987, 4: 50--55. Google Scholar

[119] Zheng Y P. Multiperson decision-making and game theory. Inform Control, 1987, 1: 38--45. Google Scholar

[120] Marden J R, Arslan G, Shamma J S. Connections between cooperative control and potential games illustrated on the consensus problem. In: Proceedings of European Control Conference, Kos, 2007. 4604--4611. Google Scholar

[121] Marden J R, Arslan G, Shamma J S. Cooperative control and potential games. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybernet Part B, 2009, 39: 1393--1407. Google Scholar

[122] Young H P. Individual Strategy and Social Structure. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1998. Google Scholar

[123] Marden J R, Arslan G, Shamma J S. Joint strategy fictitious play with inertia for potential games. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2009, 54: 208--220. Google Scholar

[124] Hart S, Mas-Colell A. A simple adaptive procedure leading to correlated equilibrium. Econometrica, 2000, 68: 1127--1150. Google Scholar

[125] Sutton R S, Barto A G. Reinforcement Learning: an Introduction. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1998. Google Scholar

[126] Fudenberg D, Levine D K. The Theory of Learning in Games. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1998. Google Scholar

[127] Du J M, Wu B, Altrock P M, et al. Aspiration dynamics of multi-player games in finite populations. J Royal Soc Interface, 2014, 11: 20140077. Google Scholar

[128] Du J M, Wu B, Wang L. Aspiration dynamics in structured population acts as if in a well-mixed one. Sci Rep, 2015, 5: 8014. Google Scholar

Copyright 2019 Science China Press Co., Ltd. 《中国科学》杂志社有限责任公司 版权所有

京ICP备18024590号-1