Maximising the Influence of Temporary Participants in Opinion Formation
Pages 2104 - 2110
Abstract
DeGroot-style opinion formation presumes a continuous interaction among agents of a social network. Hence, it cannot handle agents external to the social network that interact only temporarily with the permanent ones. Many real-world organisations and individuals fall into such a category. For instance, a company tries to persuade as many as possible to buy its products and, due to various constraints, can only exert its influence for a limited amount of time. We propose a variant of the DeGroot model that allows an external agent to interact with the permanent ones for a preset period of time. We obtain several insights on maximising an external agent's influence in opinion formation by analysing and simulating the variant.
References
[1]
Vincenzo Auletta, Diodato Ferraioli, Valeria Fionda, and Gianluigi Greco. 2019. Maximizing the Spread of an Opinion When Tertium Datur Est. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems. 1207--1215.
[2]
Vincenzo Auletta, Diodato Ferraioli, and Gianluigi Greco. 2020. On the complexity of reasoning about opinion diffusion under majority dynamics. Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 284 (2020), 103--288.
[3]
Sirin Botan, Umberto Grandi, and Laurent Perrussel. 2019. Multi-Issue Opinion Diffusion under Constraints. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems. 828--836.
[4]
Robert Bredereck, Lilian Jacobs, and Leon Kellerhals. 2020. Maximizing the Spread of an Opinion in Few Steps: Opinion Diffusion in Non-Binary Networks. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 1622--1628.
[5]
Markus Brill, Edith Elkind, Ulle Endriss, and Umberto Grandi. 2016. Pairwise Diffusion of Preference Rankings in Social Networks. In Proceedings of the 25th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 130--136.
[6]
Wei Chen, Carlos Castillo, and Lakes V. S. Lakshmanan. 2013. Information and Influence Propagation in Social Networks. Morgan & Claypool.
[7]
Dmitry Chistikov, Grzegorz Lisowski, Michael S. Paterson, and Paolo Turrini. 2020. Convergence of opinion diffusion is PSPACE-complete. In Proceedings of the 34th AAAI Conference (AAAI-2020).
[8]
Laurence Cholvy. 2018. Opinion diffusion and influence: A logical approach. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, Vol. 93 (2018), 24--39.
[9]
Zoé Christoff and Davide Grossi. 2017. Binary Voting with Delegable Proxy: An Analysis of Liquid Democracy. In Proceedings 16th Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge. 134--150.
[10]
Guillaume Deffuant, David Neau, Frederic Amblard, and Gérard Weisbuch. 2000. Mixing beliefs among interacting agents. Advances in Complex Systems, Vol. 03, 01n04 (2000), 87--98.
[11]
Morris H. DeGroot. 1974. Reaching a Consensus. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc., Vol. 69, 345 (1974), 118--121.
[12]
Pedro Domingos and Matt Richardson. 2001. Mining the Network Value of Customers. In Proceedings of the Seventh ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. 57--66.
[13]
Piotr Faliszewski, Rica Gonen, Martin Koutecký, and Nimrod Talmon. 2018. Opinion Diffusion and Campaigning on Society Graphs. In Proceedings of the 27th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 219--225.
[14]
Diodato Ferraioli and Carmine Ventre. 2019. Social pressure in opinion dynamics. Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. 795 (2019), 345--361.
[15]
Noah E. Friedkin and Eugene C. Johnsen. 1990. Social influence and opinions. The Journal of Mathematical Sociology, Vol. 15, 3--4 (1990), 193--206.
[16]
Umberto Grandi, Emiliano Lorini, Arianna Novaro, and Laurent Perrussel. 2017. Strategic Disclosure of Opinions on a Social Network. In Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems. 1196--1204.
[17]
Rainer Hegselmann and Ulrich Krause. 2002. Opinion dynamics and bounded confidence: models, analysis and simulation. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Vol. 5, 3 (2002).
[18]
Matthew O. Jackson. 2008. Social and Economic Networks. Princeton University Press.
[19]
David Kempe, Jon Kleinberg, and Éva Tardos. 2003. Maximizing the Spread of Influence through a Social Network. In Proceedings of the Ninth ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. 137--146.
[20]
David Kempe, Jon Kleinberg, and Éva Tardos. 2005. Influential Nodes in a Diffusion Model for Social Networks. In Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Automata, Languages and Programming. 1127--1138.
[21]
Yuchen Li, Ju Fan, Yanhao Wang, and Kian-Lee Tan. 2018. Influence Maximization on Social Graphs: A Survey. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, Vol. 30, 10 (2018), 1852--1872.
[22]
Naoki Masuda. 2015. Opinion control in complex networks. New Journal of Physics, Vol. 17, 3 (mar 2015), 033--031.
[23]
Carl D. Meyer. 2000. Matrix Analysis and Applied Linear Algebra. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics.
[24]
Anton V. Proskurnikov and Roberto Tempo. 2017. A tutorial on modeling and analysis of dynamic social networks. Part I. Annual Reviews in Control, Vol. 43 (2017), 65--79.
[25]
Ulrich Krause Rainer Hegselmann. 2015. Opinion dynamics under the influence of radical groups, charismatic leaders, and other constant signals: A simple unifying model. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, Vol. 10, 3 (2015), 477--509.
[26]
Zhiqiang Zhuang, Kewen Wang, Junhu Wang, Heng Zhang, Zhe Wang, and Zhiguo Gong. 2020. Lifting Majority to Unanimity in Opinion Diffusion. In In proceedings of the 24th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 259--266.
Index Terms
- Maximising the Influence of Temporary Participants in Opinion Formation
Recommendations
Opinion Leader Detection in Online Social Networks Based on Output and Input Links
AbstractThe understanding of how users in a network update their opinions based on their neighbours’ opinions has attracted a great deal of interest in the field of network science, and a growing body of literature recognises the significance of this ...
Opinion Formation with Imperfect Agents as an Evolutionary Process
We develop and simulate an interaction-based model of continuous opinion formation under bounded confidence to identify conditions and understand circumstances that lead a society into either a consensus, multiple opinion classes or perpetual opinion ...
Opinion dynamics in social networks under the influence of mass media
AbstractMass media and social networks have become the primary channels for people to obtain and share information. The news and information to which people are exposed or that they actively acquire can potentially change their opinions on specific ...
Highlights- An opinion dynamics model with media diversity and agent heterogeneity is proposed.
- The opinion distribution of the model at the steady state is analytically obtained.
- Ultimately only the opinions held by media outlets or stubborn ...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
May 2024
2898 pages
ISBN:9798400704864
- General Chairs:
- Mehdi Dastani,
- Jaime Simão Sichman,
- Program Chairs:
- Natasha Alechina,
- Virginia Dignum
Sponsors
Publisher
International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems
Richland, SC
Publication History
Published: 06 May 2024
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Conference
AAMAS '24
Sponsor:
AAMAS '24: International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems
May 6 - 10, 2024
Auckland, New Zealand
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 1,155 of 5,036 submissions, 23%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 21Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)21
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)5
Reflects downloads up to 16 Nov 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in