Abstract:Both humans and social animals live in groups and are frequently forced to choose between options with different qualities. When there are no leader agents controlling the group decision, consensus can be achieved through repeated interactions among group members. Various studies on collective decision-making illustrate how the dynamics of the opinions are determined by the structure of the social network and the methods that individuals use to share and update their opinion upon a social interaction. In this paper, we are interested in further exploring how cognitive, social, and environmental factors interactively contribute to determining the outcome of a collective best-of- n decision process involving asymmetric options, i.e., different costs and/or benefits for each option. We propose and study a novel model capturing those different factors, i) the cognitive load in processing social information, ii) the number of zealots (i.e., asocial agents who never change their opinion), iii) the option qualities, iv) the social connectivity structure, and v) the degree centrality of the asocial agents (i.e., the number of neighbours). By using the heterogeneous mean-field approach, we study the impact of the above-mentioned factors in the decision dynamics. Our findings indicate that when susceptible agents, i.e., individuals who change their opinion to conform with others, use the voter model as a mechanism to update their opinion, both the number and the degree of connectivity of the zealots can lead the population to converge towards the lowest quality option. Instead, when susceptible agents use methods demanding a larger cognitive cost (e.g., the majority rule), the group is marginally impacted by the presence of zealots. The results of the analytical model are complemented and extended by agent-based simulations. Our analysis also shows that the network topology can modulate the influence of zealots on group dynamics. In fact, in homogeneous networks where all nodes have the same degree, any location of the zealots has similar impact on the group dynamics. Instead, when the network is heterogeneous, our simulations confirm the model predictions showing that placing the zealots in the network hubs (nodes with several neighbours) has a much larger impact than placing them in lower-degree nodes.

Studying speed-accuracy trade-offs in best-of-n collective decision-making through heterogeneous mean-field modeling

Speed-accuracy trade-offs in best-of- collective decision making through heterogeneous mean-field modeling

Improving the consensus performance via predictive mechanisms

Quantifying the impact of network structure on speed and accuracy in collective decision-making

On the role of zealots in a best-of-n problem on a heterogeneous network

Speed-vs-Accuracy Tradeoff in Collective Estimation: An Adaptive Exploration-Exploitation Case

Network Structure and Input Integration in Competing Firing Rate Models for Decision-Making.

Collective Behavior Decision Based on Edge Dynamics

Simulation of Collective Decision-Making with Incomplete Information

On the evolution of adaptable and scalable mechanisms for collective decision-making in a swarm of robots

Evolution of Collective Decision-Making Mechanisms for Collective Perception

Consensus formation and relative stimulus perception in quality-sensitive, interdependent agent systems

Evolution of collective fairness in complex networks through degree-based role assignment

On the impact of zealots in a population of susceptible agents in a best-of-n problem within a heterogeneous network

Optimal information transfer and stochastic resonance in collective decision making

A Cognitive Computational Approach to Social and Collective Decision-Making

Human-Collective Collaborative Site Selection

A Consensus Model with Non-Cooperative Behavior Adaptive Management Based on Cognitive Psychological State Computation in Large-Scale Group Decision

Impact of Variable Speed on Collective Movement of Animal Groups

Competition of Dynamic Self-Confidence and Inhomogeneous Individual Influence in Voter Models.

Collective decision-making under changing social environments among agents adapted to sparse connectivity