The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Convergence of Type-Symmetric and Cut-Balanced Consensus Seeking Systems
Open accessAbstract
We consider continuous-time consensus seeking systems whose time-dependent interactions are cut-balanced, in the following sense: if a group of agents influences the remaining ones, the former group is also influenced by the remaining ones by at least a proportional amount. Models involving symmetric interconnections and models in which a weighted average of the agent values is conserved are special cases. We prove that such systems always converge. We give a sufficient condition on the evolving interaction topology for the limit values of two agents to be the same. Conversely, we show that if our condition is not satisfied, then these limits are generically different. These results allow treating systems where the agent interactions are a priori unknown, being for example random or determined endogenously by the agent values.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Consensus Problems in Networks of Agents With Switching Topology and Time-Delays
Olfati-Saber, R., & Murray, R. M. (2004) · IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control · doi:10.1109/tac.2004.834113 · Cited by 12,788 · cited 2×
“For example, Olfati-Saber and Murray [29] consider the system d dtx i ( t ) = j”
Consensus and Cooperation in Networked Multi-Agent Systems
Olfati-Saber, R., Fax, J. A., & Murray, R. M. (2007) · Proceedings of the IEEE · doi:10.1109/jproc.2006.887293 · Cited by 10,522 · cited 1×
“Systems of the form (1) have attracted considerable attention [19], [27], [29], [30], [37] (see also [28], [31] for surveys), with motivation coming from decentralized coordination, data fusion [6], [38], animal flocking [9], [17], [36], and models of social behavior [1], [4], [5], [8], [12], [21],…”
Coordination of groups of mobile autonomous agents using nearest neighbor rules
Jadbabaie, A., Lin, J., & Morse, A. S. (2003) · IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control · doi:10.1109/tac.2003.812781 · Cited by 8,339
Statistical physics of social dynamics
Castellano, C., Fortunato, S., & Loreto, V. (2009) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.81.591 · Cited by 4,119
Mixing beliefs among interacting agents
Deffuant, G., Neau, D., Amblard, F., & Weisbuch, G. (2000) · Advances in Complex Systems · doi:10.1142/s0219525900000078 · Cited by 2,165
Cited by
A tutorial on modeling and analysis of dynamic social networks. Part I
Proskurnikov, A. V., & Tempo, R. (2017) · Annual Reviews in Control · doi:10.1016/j.arcontrol.2017.03.002 · Cited by 553
Opinion Dynamics in Social Networks With Hostile Camps: Consensus vs. Polarization
Proskurnikov, A. V., Matveev, A. S., & Cao, M. (2016) · IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control · doi:10.1109/tac.2015.2471655 · Cited by 357
A tutorial on modeling and analysis of dynamic social networks. Part II
Proskurnikov, A. V., & Tempo, R. (2018) · Annual Reviews in Control · doi:10.1016/j.arcontrol.2018.03.005 · Cited by 294
Metadata
- Authors
- Hendrickx, J. M., & Tsitsiklis, J. N.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control
- Published
- 2013-01
- Volume
- 58
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 214-218
- ISSN
- 0018-9286 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-2523
- OpenAlex
- W2028706574
- Cited by
- 207
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 29.96
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Convergence of Type-Symmetric and Cut-Balanced Consensus Seeking Systems. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tac.2012.2203214
- The paper
- Hendrickx, J. M., & Tsitsiklis, J. N. (2013). Convergence of Type-Symmetric and Cut-Balanced Consensus Seeking Systems. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control. https://doi.org/10.1109/tac.2012.2203214
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
