Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 186

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Game-Theoretic Analysis of the Hegselmann-Krause Model for Opinion Dynamics in Finite Dimensions

Open access
Etesami, Seyed Rasoul, Basar, Tamer·2015·IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control

Abstract

We consider the Hegselmann-Krause model for opinion dynamics and study the evolution of the system under various settings. We first analyze the termination time of the synchronous Hegselmann-Krause dynamics in arbitrary finite dimensions and show that the termination time in general only depends on the number of agents involved in the dynamics. To the best of our knowledge, that is the sharpest bound for the termination time of such dynamics that removes dependency of the termination time from the dimension of the ambient space, and connects the convergence speed of the dynamics to the eigenvalues of the adjacency matrix of the connectivity graph in the Hegselmann-Krause dynamics. This answers an open question in the paper by Bhattacharyya et al. on how to obtain a tighter upper bound for the termination time. Furthermore, we study the asynchronous Hegselmann-Krause model from a novel game-theoretic approach and show that the evolution of an asynchronous Hegselmann-Krause model is equivalent to a sequence of best response updates in a well-designed potential game. We then provide a polynomial upper bound for the expected time and expected number of switching topologies until the dynamic reaches an arbitrarily small neighborhood of its equilibrium points, provided that the agents update uniformly at random. This is a step toward analysis of heterogeneous Hegselmann-Krause dynamics. Finally, we consider the heterogeneous Hegselmann-Krause dynamics and provide a necessary condition for the finite termination time of such dynamics. In particular, we sketch some future directions toward more detailed analysis of the heterogeneous Hegselmann-Krause model.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tac.2015.2394954

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 186

Metadata

Authors
Etesami, S. R., & Basar, T.
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control
Published
2015-07
Volume
60
Issue
7
Pages
1886-1897
ISSN
  • 0018-9286 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-2523
OpenAlex
W2020433780
Cited by
186
References
3
FWCI
13.47
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: Game-Theoretic Analysis of the Hegselmann-Krause Model for Opinion Dynamics in Finite Dimensions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tac.2015.2394954
The paper
Etesami, S. R., & Basar, T. (2015). Game-Theoretic Analysis of the Hegselmann-Krause Model for Opinion Dynamics in Finite Dimensions. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control. https://doi.org/10.1109/tac.2015.2394954

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.