Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 270

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Structural Balance and Opinion Separation in Trust–Mistrust Social Networks

Open access
Xia, Weiguo, Cao, Ming, Johansson, Karl Henrik·2016·IEEE Transactions on Control of Network Systems

Abstract

Structural balance theory has been developed in sociology and psychology to explain how interacting agents, for example, countries, political parties, opinionated individuals, with mixed trust and mistrust relationships evolve into polarized camps. Recent results have shown that structural balance is necessary for polarization in networks with fixed, strongly connected neighbor relationships when the opinion dynamics are described by DeGroot-type averaging rules. We develop this line of research in this paper in two steps. First, we consider fixed, not necessarily strongly connected, neighbor relationships. It is shown that if the network includes a strongly connected subnetwork containing mistrust, which influences the rest of the network, then no opinion clustering is possible when that subnetwork is not structurally balanced; all of the opinions become neutralized in the end. In contrast, it is shown that when that subnetwork is indeed structurally balanced, the agents of the subnetwork evolve into two polarized camps and the opinions of all other agents in the network spread between these two polarized opinions. Second, we consider time-varying neighbor relationships. We show that the opinion separation criteria carry over if the conditions for fixed graphs are extended to joint graphs. The results are developed for both discrete-time and continuous-time models.

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/tcns.2015.2437528

Cites

1 of 1 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

  • Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications

    Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815478 · Cited by 17,557 · cited 2×

    “Then the network is structurally balanced if all the vertices of its signed graph can be divided into two disjoint sets such that every edge between vertices in the same set is with a positive sign and every edge between vertices in the distinct sets is with a negative sign [10].”

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 270

Metadata

Authors
Xia, W., Cao, M., & Johansson, K. H.
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Control of Network Systems
Published
2016-03
Volume
3
Issue
1
Pages
46-56
ISSN
2325-5870 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3101211700
Cited by
270
References
1
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: Structural Balance and Opinion Separation in Trust–Mistrust Social Networks. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tcns.2015.2437528
The paper
Xia, W., Cao, M., & Johansson, K. H. (2016). Structural Balance and Opinion Separation in Trust–Mistrust Social Networks. IEEE Transactions on Control of Network Systems. https://doi.org/10.1109/tcns.2015.2437528

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.