Paper detail

Heterophilious dynamics enhances consensus

We review a general class of models for self-organized dynamics based on alignment. The dynamics of such systems is governed solely by interactions among individuals or "agents," with the tendency to adjust to their `environmental averages'. This, in turn, leads to the formation of clusters, e.g., colonies of ants, flocks of birds, parties of people, etc. A natural question which arises in this context is to understand when and how clusters emerge through the self-alignment of agents, and what type of "rules of engagement" influence the formation of such clusters. Of particular interest to us are cases in which the self-organized behavior tends to concentrate into one cluster, reflecting a consensus of opinions, flocking or concentration of other positions intrinsic to the dynamics. Many standard models for self-organized dynamics in social, biological and physical science assume that the intensity of alignment increases as agents get closer, reflecting a common tendency to align with those who think or act alike. Moreover, "Similarity breeds connection," reflects our intuition that increasing the intensity of alignment as the difference of positions decreases, is more likely to lead to a consensus. We argue here that the converse is true: when the dynamics is driven by local interactions, it is more likely to approach a consensus when the interactions among agents \emph{increase} as a function of their difference in position. \emph{Heterophily} --- the tendency to bond more with those who are different rather than with those who are similar, plays a decisive rôle in the process of clustering. We point out that the number of clusters in heterophilious dynamics \emph{decreases} as the heterophily dependence among agents increases. In particular, sufficiently strong heterophilious interactions enhance consensus.

preprint2014arXivOpen 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.