Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
opinion serve as the initial input for the opinion dynamics process as depicted
in Fig. 2.
To explore the behavior of the model and the spatial and non-spatial opinion
patterns three different scenarios were run each having a different range of
d
val-
ues (drawn from a uniform distribution). For the first scenario each agent was
assigned a
d
in the range of [0
.
1
,
03] indicating non-cooperative actors. The sec-
ond scenario the
d
values varies between [0.3,0.6], and the third scenario
d
varies
between [0.6,0.9] representing extremely cooperative actors. The parameters
μ
of equations 12 and 13 is kept constant for all scenarios.
5R su s
Figure 5 shows a map indicating the differences in the spatial distribuation of the
opinions at time
t
=1,andtime
t
= 25, and
t
50 for the three scenarios. The
maps show the difference between the range of opinions for each location in four
classes. The white areas show locations having a low level of agreements amongst
the agent i.e. the range of opinions is large while the dark areas have a high level
of opinion i.e. the range of opinions is low. Looking at the patterns it shows
that for the non-cooperative scenario (
d
=[0
.
1
,
0
.
3]) many areas remain “non-
negotiable” (the white area) while for the extreme cooperative (
d
=[0
.
6
,
0
.
9])
scenario only few conflict areas remain after 50 iterations.
The differences of formulation of opinions can also be noted from the non
spatial patterns presented in Fig. 6. The Figure shows the development of the
−
Fig. 5.
Differences in spatial distribution opinions between the 3 agents for t= 1, and
t=50 for various d in 4 classes of agreement (white = low agreement ...black = high
agreement)
