-
How social reinforcement learning can lead to metastable polarisation and the voter model
Authors:
Benedikt V. Meylahn,
Janusz M. Meylahn
Abstract:
Previous explanations for the persistence of polarization of opinions have typically included modelling assumptions that predispose the possibility of polarization (e.g.\ repulsive interactions). An exception is recent research showing that polarization is stable when agents form their opinions using reinforcement learning.
We show that the polarization observed in this model is not stable, but…
▽ More
Previous explanations for the persistence of polarization of opinions have typically included modelling assumptions that predispose the possibility of polarization (e.g.\ repulsive interactions). An exception is recent research showing that polarization is stable when agents form their opinions using reinforcement learning.
We show that the polarization observed in this model is not stable, but exhibits consensus asymptotically with probability one. By constructing a link between the reinforcement learning model and the voter model, we argue that the observed polarization is metastable. Finally, we show that a slight modification in the learning process of the agents changes the model from being non-ergodic to being ergodic.
Our results show that reinforcement learning may be a powerful method for modelling polarization in opinion dynamics, but that the tools appropriate for analysing such models crucially depend on the properties of the resulting systems. Properties which are determined by the details of the learning process.
△ Less
Submitted 12 June, 2024;
originally announced June 2024.
-
Interpersonal trust: Asymptotic analysis of a stochastic coordination game with multi-agent learning
Authors:
Benedikt V. Meylahn,
Arnoud V. den Boer,
Michel Mandjes
Abstract:
We study the interpersonal trust of a population of agents, asking whether chance may decide if a population ends up in a high trust or low trust state. We model this by a discrete time, random matching stochastic coordination game. Agents are endowed with an exponential smoothing learning rule about the behaviour of their neighbours. We find that, with probability one in the long run the whole po…
▽ More
We study the interpersonal trust of a population of agents, asking whether chance may decide if a population ends up in a high trust or low trust state. We model this by a discrete time, random matching stochastic coordination game. Agents are endowed with an exponential smoothing learning rule about the behaviour of their neighbours. We find that, with probability one in the long run the whole population either always cooperates or always defects. By simulation we study the impact of the distributions of the payoffs in the game and of the exponential smoothing learning (memory of the agents). We find, that as the agent memory increases or as the size of the population increases, the actual dynamics start to resemble the expectation of the process. We conclude that it is indeed possible that different populations may converge upon high or low trust between its citizens simply by chance, though the game parameters (context of the society) may be quite telling.
△ Less
Submitted 17 May, 2024; v1 submitted 6 February, 2024;
originally announced February 2024.
-
Opinion dynamics beyond social influence
Authors:
Benedikt V. Meylahn,
Christa Searle
Abstract:
We present an opinion dynamics model framework discarding two common assumptions in the literature: (a) that there is direct influence between beliefs of neighbouring agents, and (b) that agent belief is static in the absence of social influence. Agents in our framework learn from random experiences which possibly reinforce their belief. Agents determine whether they switch opinions by comparing t…
▽ More
We present an opinion dynamics model framework discarding two common assumptions in the literature: (a) that there is direct influence between beliefs of neighbouring agents, and (b) that agent belief is static in the absence of social influence. Agents in our framework learn from random experiences which possibly reinforce their belief. Agents determine whether they switch opinions by comparing their belief to a threshold. Subsequently, influence of an alter on an ego is not direct incorporation of the alter's belief into the ego's but by adjusting the ego's decision making criteria. We provide an instance from the framework in which social influence between agents generalises majority rules updating. We conduct a sensitivity analysis as well as a pair of experiments concerning heterogeneous population parameters. We conclude that the framework is capable of producing consensus, polarisation and fragmentation with only assimilative forces between agents which typically, in other models, lead exclusively to consensus.
△ Less
Submitted 16 May, 2023;
originally announced May 2023.
-
Trusting: Alone and together
Authors:
Benedikt V. Meylahn,
Arnoud V. den Boer,
Michel Mandjes
Abstract:
We study the problem of an agent continuously faced with the decision of placing or not placing trust in an institution. The agent makes use of Bayesian learning in order to estimate the institution's true trustworthiness and makes the decision to place trust based on myopic rationality. Using elements from random walk theory, we explicitly derive the probability that such an agent ceases placing…
▽ More
We study the problem of an agent continuously faced with the decision of placing or not placing trust in an institution. The agent makes use of Bayesian learning in order to estimate the institution's true trustworthiness and makes the decision to place trust based on myopic rationality. Using elements from random walk theory, we explicitly derive the probability that such an agent ceases placing trust at some point in the relationship, as well as the expected time spent placing trust conditioned on their discontinuation thereof.
We then continue by modelling two truster agents, each in their own relationship to the institution. We consider two natural models of communication between them. In the first (``observable rewards'') agents disclose their experiences with the institution with one another, while in the second (``observable actions'') agents merely witness the actions of their neighbour, i.e., placing or not placing trust. Under the same assumptions as in the single agent case, we describe the evolution of the beliefs of agents under these two different communication models. Both the probability of ceasing to place trust and the expected time in the system elude explicit expressions, despite there being only two agents. We therefore conduct a simulation study in order to compare the effect of the different kinds of communication on the trust dynamics.
We find that a pair of agents in both communication models has a greater chance of learning the true trustworthiness of an institution than a single agent. Communication between agents promotes the formation of long term trust with a trustworthy institution as well as the timely exit from a trust relationship with an untrustworthy institution. Contrary to what one might expect, we find that having less information (observing each other's actions instead of experiences) can sometimes be beneficial to the agents.
△ Less
Submitted 4 February, 2024; v1 submitted 3 March, 2023;
originally announced March 2023.
