Paper detail

Effect of multiple degrees of ambivalence on the Naming Game

We examine a modified Naming Game in the mean field where there are multiple degrees of ambivalence. Once an agent in one state fears an opinion one way or another, he or she moves one step in the appropriate direction. In the absence of zealots, the two consensus states are stable steady states and the uniform distribution is an unstable steady state. With zealots for one opinion only, there is a critical value below which there are three steady states and above which there is only one. Consensus in favor of the zealots' opinion is the steady state that always exists, and is stable. The second steady state is the uniform distribution in the absence of zealots, and moves away from the zealots' opinion as the number of zealots increases. This state is unstable. The last steady state starts at consensus against the zealots, and moves toward the zealots' opinion as the number of zealots increases. This state is stable. When zealots are added on both sides, the "beak" pattern observed for the Naming Game remains, with the region of multiple steady states growing with the addition of more intermediate states.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.