Abstract
AbstractIn this paper we study a generalized case of best-of-n model, which considers three kind of agents: zealots, individuals who remain stubborn and do not change their opinion; informed agents, individuals that can change their opinion, are able to assess the quality of the different options; and uninformed agents, individuals that can change their opinion but are not able to assess the quality of the different opinions. We study the consensus in different regimes: we vary the quality of the options, the percentage of zealots and the percentage of informed versus uninformed agents. We also consider two decision mechanisms: the voter and majority rule. We study this problem using numerical simulations and mathematical models, and we validate our findings on physical kilobot experiments. We find that (1) if the number of zealots for the lowest quality option is not too high, the decision-making process is driven toward the highest quality option; (2) this effect can be improved increasing the number of informed agents that can counteract the effect of adverse zealots; (3) when the two options have very similar qualities, in order to keep high consensus to the best quality it is necessary to have higher proportions of informed agents.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference53 articles.
1. Albani, D., Manoni, T., Nardi, D. & Trianni, V. (2018). Dynamic UAV swarm deployment for non-uniform coverage. In Proceedings of the 17th international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (pp. 523–531). IFAAMAS.
2. Berekméri, E., & Zafeiris, A. (2020). Optimal collective decision-making: Consensus, accuracy and the effects of limited access to information. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 16997.
3. Bhat, D., & Redner, S. (2019). Nonuniversal opinion dynamics driven by opposing external influences. Physical Review E, 100 050301.
4. Bialek, W., Cavagna, A., Giardina, I., Mora, T., Silvestri, E., Viale, M., & Walczak, A. M. (2012). Statistical mechanics for natural flocks of birds. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(13), 4786–4791.
5. Bose, T., Reina, A., & Marshall, J. A. R. (2017). Collective decision-making. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 16, 30–34.
Cited by
9 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献