The process of opinion formation through synthesis and contrast of different viewpoints has been the subject of many studies in economics and social sciences. Today, this process manifests itself also in online social networks and social media. The key characteristic of successful promotion campaigns is that they take into consideration such opinion-formation dynamics in order to create a overall favorable opinion about a specific information item, such as a person, a product, or an idea. In this paper, we adopt a well-established model for social-opinion dynamics and formalize the campaign-design problem as the problem of identifying a set of target individuals whose positive opinion about an information item will maximize the overall positive opinion for the item in the social network. We call this problem CAMPAIGN. We study the complexity of the CAMPAIGN problem, and design algorithms for solving it. Our experiments on real data demonstrate the efficiency and practical utility of our algorithms.
Key to our paper is the work by @cite_4 . In fact, we adopt the same opinion-dynamics model as in @cite_4 , where individuals selfishly form opinions to minimize their personal cost. However, focus on quantifying the social cost of this lack of central coordination between individuals, i.e., the , and they consider a network-design problem with the objective of reducing the social cost at equilibrium. Our work on the other hand, focuses on designing a promotion campaign so that, at equilibrium, the overall positive inclination towards a particular opinion is maximized.
@cite_4
2950984039 2064824188 2110155180 2075488114
The question of how people form their opinion has fascinated economists and sociologists for quite some time. In many of the models, a group of people in a social network, each holding a numerical opinion, arrive at a shared opinion through repeated averaging with their neighbors in the network. Motivated by the observation that consensus is rarely reached in real opinion dynamics, we study a related sociological model in which individuals' intrinsic beliefs counterbalance the averaging process and yield a diversity of opinions. By interpreting the repeated averaging as best-response dynamics in an underlying game with natural payoffs, and the limit of the process as an equilibrium, we are able to study the cost of disagreement in these models relative to a social optimum. We provide a tight bound on the cost at equilibrium relative to the optimum; our analysis draws a connection between these agreement models and extremal problems that lead to generalized eigenvalues. We also consider a natural network design problem in this setting: which links can we add to the underlying network to reduce the cost of disagreement at equilibrium? The notions of user equilibrium (UE) and system optimum (SO) often allude to the literature together with the well-known principle of marginal-cost pricing in traffic network analyses. This pricing principle states that the UE flow pattern on a network can be driven to an SO in the sense of total travel cost minimization by charging a toll on each link equal to the difference between marginal social cost and marginal private cost. In reality, users do not always behave in a UE manner, typically when there exist oligopoly Cournot-Nash (CN) firms. Users in a CN firm cooperate among themselves to minimize total cost of the firm and compete against others. In the presence of such UE-CN mixed equilibrium behaviors, we are interested in whether an SO flow pattern remains attainable by meaningful link tolls. In this paper we show that in a network with both UE and CN users, applying the traditional marginal-cost pricing for a system optimum requires that link tolls be differentiated across user classes. Because users differ from one another in an unobservable way, it is impossible to introduce discriminatory tolling on a network in a mixed behaviour equilibrium. We then seek alternative meaningful tolls by establishing the existence of nonnegative anonymous link tolls to decentralize the SO into a UE-CN mixed behavior equilibrium with resort to a rigorous mathematical programming approach. We study the efficiency implications of competition among profit-maximizing service providers in communication networks. Service providers set prices for transmission of flows through their (sub)network. The central question is whether the presence of prices will help or hinder network performance. We investigate this question by considering the difference between users' willingness to pay and delay costs as the efficiency metric. Previous work has demonstrated that in networks consisting of parallel links, efficiency losses from competition are bounded. Nevertheless, parallel-link networks are special, and in most networks, traffic has to simultaneously traverse links (or subnetworks) operated by independent service providers. The simplest network topology allowing this feature is the parallel-serial structure, which we study in this paper. In contrast to existing results, we show that in the presence of serial links, the efficiency loss relative to the social optimum can be arbitrarily large. The reason for this degradation of performance is the double marginalization problem, whereby each serial provider charges high prices not taking into account the effect of this strategy on the profits of other providers along the same path. Nevertheless, when there are no delay costs without transmission (i.e., latencies at zero are equal to zero), irrespective of the number of serial and parallel providers, the efficiency of strong oligopoly equilibria can be bounded by 1 2, where strong oligopoly equilibria are equilibria in which each provider plays a strict best response and all of the traffic is transmitted. However, even with strong oligopoly equilibria, inefficiency can be arbitrarily large when the assumption of no delay costs without transmission is relaxed. We consider the problem of characterizing user equilibria and optimal solutions for selfish routing in a given network. We extend the known models by considering malicious behavior. While selfish users follow a strategy that minimizes their individual cost, a malicious user will use his flow through the network in an effort to cause the maximum possible damage to the overall cost. We define a generalized model, present characterizations of flows at equilibrium and prove bounds for the ratio of the social cost of a flow at equilibrium over the cost when centralized coordination among users is allowed.