Cargando…

A framework to analyze opinion formation models

Comparing model predictions with real data is crucial to improve and validate a model. For opinion formation models, validation based on real data is uncommon and difficult to obtain, also due to the lack of systematic approaches for a meaningful comparison. We introduce a framework to assess opinio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Devia, Carlos Andres, Giordano, Giulia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9352787/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35927562
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-17348-z
_version_ 1784762728592703488
author Devia, Carlos Andres
Giordano, Giulia
author_facet Devia, Carlos Andres
Giordano, Giulia
author_sort Devia, Carlos Andres
collection PubMed
description Comparing model predictions with real data is crucial to improve and validate a model. For opinion formation models, validation based on real data is uncommon and difficult to obtain, also due to the lack of systematic approaches for a meaningful comparison. We introduce a framework to assess opinion formation models, which can be used to determine the qualitative outcomes that an opinion formation model can produce, and compare model predictions with real data. The proposed approach relies on a histogram-based classification algorithm, and on transition tables. The algorithm classifies an opinion distribution as perfect consensus, consensus, polarization, clustering, or dissensus; these qualitative categories were identified from World Values Survey data. The transition tables capture the qualitative evolution of the opinion distribution between an initial and a final time. We compute the real transition tables based on World Values Survey data from different years, as well as the predicted transition tables produced by the French-DeGroot, Weighted-Median, Bounded Confidence, and Quantum Game models, and we compare them. Our results provide insight into the evolution of real-life opinions and highlight key directions to improve opinion formation models.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9352787
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93527872022-08-06 A framework to analyze opinion formation models Devia, Carlos Andres Giordano, Giulia Sci Rep Article Comparing model predictions with real data is crucial to improve and validate a model. For opinion formation models, validation based on real data is uncommon and difficult to obtain, also due to the lack of systematic approaches for a meaningful comparison. We introduce a framework to assess opinion formation models, which can be used to determine the qualitative outcomes that an opinion formation model can produce, and compare model predictions with real data. The proposed approach relies on a histogram-based classification algorithm, and on transition tables. The algorithm classifies an opinion distribution as perfect consensus, consensus, polarization, clustering, or dissensus; these qualitative categories were identified from World Values Survey data. The transition tables capture the qualitative evolution of the opinion distribution between an initial and a final time. We compute the real transition tables based on World Values Survey data from different years, as well as the predicted transition tables produced by the French-DeGroot, Weighted-Median, Bounded Confidence, and Quantum Game models, and we compare them. Our results provide insight into the evolution of real-life opinions and highlight key directions to improve opinion formation models. Nature Publishing Group UK 2022-08-04 /pmc/articles/PMC9352787/ /pubmed/35927562 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-17348-z Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Devia, Carlos Andres
Giordano, Giulia
A framework to analyze opinion formation models
title A framework to analyze opinion formation models
title_full A framework to analyze opinion formation models
title_fullStr A framework to analyze opinion formation models
title_full_unstemmed A framework to analyze opinion formation models
title_short A framework to analyze opinion formation models
title_sort framework to analyze opinion formation models
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9352787/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35927562
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-17348-z
work_keys_str_mv AT deviacarlosandres aframeworktoanalyzeopinionformationmodels
AT giordanogiulia aframeworktoanalyzeopinionformationmodels
AT deviacarlosandres frameworktoanalyzeopinionformationmodels
AT giordanogiulia frameworktoanalyzeopinionformationmodels