Social media and social networking sites have become a global pinboard for exposition and discussion of news, topics, and ideas, where social media users often update their opinions about a particular topic by learning from the opinions shared by their friends. In this context, can we learn a data-driven model of opinion dynamics that is able to accurately forecast users' opinions? In this paper, we introduce SLANT, a probabilistic modeling framework of opinion dynamics, which represents users' opinions over time by means of marked jump diffusion stochastic differential equations, and allows for efficient model simulation and parameter estimation from historical fine grained event data. We then leverage our framework to derive a set of efficient predictive formulas for opinion forecasting and identify conditions under which opinions converge to a steady state. Experiments on data gathered from Twitter show that our model provides a good fit to the data and our formulas achieve more accurate forecasting than alternatives.

In crowd evacuation the time interval before decisive movement towards a safe place is defined as the pre-evacuation phase, and it has crucial impact on the total time required for safe egress. This process mainly refers to situation awareness and response to an external stressors, e.g., fire alarms. Due to the complexity of human cognitive process, simulation is used to study this important time interval. In this paper a binary decision process is formulated to simulate pre-evacuation time of many evacuees in a given social context. The model combines the classic opinion dynamics (the French-DeGroot model) with binary phase transition to describe how group pre-evacuation time emerges from individual interaction. The model parameters are quantitatively meaningful to human factors research within socio-psychological background, e.g., whether an individual is stubborn or open-minded, or what kind of the social topology exists among the individuals and how it matters in aggregating individuals into social groups. The modeling framework also describes collective motion of many evacuee agents in a planar space, and the resulting multi-agent system is partly similar to the Vicsek flocking model, and it is meaningful to explore complex social behavior during phase transition of a non-equilibrium process.

Understanding how group interactions influence opinion dynamics is fundamental to the study of collective behavior. In this work, we propose and study a model of opinion dynamics on $d$-uniform hypergraphs, where individuals interact through group-based (higher-order) structures rather than simple pairwise connections. Each one of the two opinions $A$ and $B$ is characterized by a quality, $Q_A$ and $Q_B$, and agents update their opinions according to a general mechanism that takes into account the weighted fraction of agents supporting either opinion and the pooling error, $α$, a proxy for the information lost during the interaction. Through bifurcation analysis of the mean-field model, we identify two critical thresholds, $α_{\text{crit}}^{(1)}$ and $α_{\text{crit}}^{(2)}$, which delimit stability regimes for the consensus states. These analytical predictions are validated through extensive agent-based simulations on both random and scale-free hypergraphs. Moreover, the analytical framework demonstrates that the bifurcation structure and critical thresholds are independent of the underlying topology of the higher-order network, depending solely on the parameters $d$, i.e., the size of the interaction groups, and the quality ratio. Finally, we bring to the fore a nontrivial effect: the large sizes of the interaction groups, could drive the system toward the adoption of the worst option.

The openness of social media enables the free exchange of opinions, but it also presents challenges in guiding opinion evolution towards global consensus. Existing methods often directly modify user views or enforce cross-group connections. These intrusive interventions undermine user autonomy, provoke psychological resistance, and reduce the efficiency of global consensus. Additionally, due to the lack of a long-term perspective, promoting local consensus often exacerbates divisions at the macro level. To address these issues, we propose the hierarchical, non-intrusive opinion guidance framework, H-NeiFi. It first establishes a two-layer dynamic model based on social roles, considering the behavioral characteristics of both experts and non-experts. Additionally, we introduce a non-intrusive neighbor filtering method that adaptively controls user communication channels. Using multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL), we optimize information propagation paths through a long-term reward function, avoiding direct interference with user interactions. Experiments show that H-NeiFi increases consensus speed by 22.0% to 30.7% and maintains global convergence even in the absence of experts. This approach enables natural and efficient consensus guidance by protecting user interaction autonomy, offering a new paradigm for social network governance.

Individual's opinions are fundamentally shaped and evolved by their interactions

In group decision-making (GDM) scenarios, uncertainty, dynamic social structures, and vague information present major challenges for traditional opinion dynamics models. To address these issues, this study proposes a novel social network group decision-making (SNGDM) framework that integrates three-way decision (3WD) theory, dynamic network reconstruction, and linguistic opinion representation. First, the 3WD mechanism is introduced to explicitly model hesitation and ambiguity in agent judgments, thereby preventing irrational decisions. Second, a connection adjustment rule based on opinion similarity is developed, enabling agents to adaptively update their communication links and better reflect the evolving nature of social relationships. Third, linguistic terms are used to describe agent opinions, allowing the model to handle subjective, vague, or incomplete information more effectively. Finally, an integrated multi-agent decision-making framework is constructed, which simultaneously considers individual uncertainty, opinion evolution, and network dynamics. The proposed model is applied to a multi-UAV cooperative decision-making scenario, where simulation results and consensus analysis demonstrate its effectiveness. Experimental comparisons further verify the advantages of the algorithm in enhancing system stability and representing realistic decision-making behaviors.

Deliberation plays a crucial role in shaping outcomes by weighing diverse perspectives before reaching decisions. With recent advancements in Natural Language Processing, it has become possible to computationally model deliberation by analyzing opinion shifts and predicting potential outcomes under varying scenarios. In this study, we present a comparative analysis of multiple NLP techniques to evaluate how effectively models interpret deliberative discourse and produce meaningful insights. Opinions from individuals of varied backgrounds were collected to construct a self-sourced dataset that reflects diverse viewpoints. Deliberation was simulated using product presentations enriched with striking facts, which often prompted measurable shifts in audience opinions. We have given comparative analysis between two models namely Frequency-Based Discourse Modulation and Quantum-Deliberation Framework which outperform the existing state of art models. Deliberation is the structured process of reasoning, dialogue, and weighing evidence before decisions are made. Unlike ordinary conversation, it emphasizes logical argumentation, inclusivity, and critical reflection.

Abstract-- We propose a model of opinion formation on resource allocation among multiple topics by multiple agents, who are subject to hard budget constraints. We define a utility function for each agent and then derive a projected dynamical system model of opinion evolution assuming that each agent myopically seeks to maximize its utility subject to its constraints. Inter-agent coupling arises from an undirected social network, while inter-topic coupling arises from resource constraints. We show that opinions always converge to the equilibrium set. We further show that the underlying opinion formation game is a potential game. We relate the equilibria of the dynamics and the Nash equilibria of the game and characterize the unique Nash equilibrium for networks with no antagonistic relations. Finally, simulations illustrate our findings. Index T erms-- Opinion dynamics, Projected dynamical systems, Utility maximization, Game theory, Multi-agent systems. Multi-agent modeling and study of opinion dynamics finds widespread applications in sociology, economics, and other fields.

Large Language Models are increasingly used to simulate human opinion dynamics, yet the effect of genuine interaction is often obscured by systematic biases. We present a Bayesian framework to disentangle and quantify three such biases: (i) a topic bias toward prior opinions in the training data; (ii) an agreement bias favoring agreement irrespective of the question; and (iii) an anchoring bias toward the initiating agent's stance. Applying this framework to multi-step dialogues reveals that opinion trajectories tend to quickly converge to a shared attractor, with the influence of the interaction fading over time, and the impact of biases differing between LLMs. In addition, we fine-tune an LLM on different sets of strongly opinionated statements (incl. misinformation) and demonstrate that the opinion attractor shifts correspondingly. Exposing stark differences between LLMs and providing quantitative tools to compare them to human subjects in the future, our approach highlights both chances and pitfalls in using LLMs as proxies for human behavior.