The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
CONTINUOUS OPINION DYNAMICS UNDER BOUNDED CONFIDENCE: A SURVEY
Open accessAbstract
Models of continuous opinion dynamics under bounded confidence have been presented independently by Krause and Hegselmann and by Deffuant et al. in 2000. They have raised a fair amount of attention in the communities of social simulation, sociophysics and complexity science. The researchers working on it come from disciplines such as physics, mathematics, computer science, social psychology and philosophy. In these models agents hold continuous opinions which they can gradually adjust if they hear the opinions of others. The idea of bounded confidence is that agents only interact if they are close in opinion to each other. Usually, the models are analyzed with agent-based simulations in a Monte Carlo style, but they can also be reformulated on the agent's density in the opinion space in a master equation style. The contribution of this survey is fourfold. First, it will present the agent-based and density-based modeling frameworks including the cases of multidimensional opinions and heterogeneous bounds of confidence. Second, it will give the bifurcation diagrams of cluster configuration in the homogeneous model with uniformly distributed initial opinions. Third, it will review the several extensions and the evolving phenomena which have been studied so far, and fourth it will state some open questions.
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
Degroot, M. H. (1974) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1974.10480137 · Cited by 4,004
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
OPINION EVOLUTION IN CLOSED COMMUNITY
SZNAJD-WERON, K., & SZNAJD, J. (2000) · International Journal of Modern Physics C · doi:10.1142/s0129183100000936 · Cited by 1,300
Weisbuch, G., Deffuant, G., Amblard, F., & Nadal, J. (2002) · Complexity · doi:10.1002/cplx.10031 · Cited by 456
Rational Consensus in Science and Society
Lehrer, K., & Wagner, C. (1981) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-009-8520-9 · Cited by 450
A stabilization theorem for dynamics of continuous opinions
Lorenz, J. (2005) · Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications · doi:10.1016/j.physa.2005.02.086 · Cited by 304
Self-citationTHE STATISTICAL DESCRIPTION OF POLARIZATION PHENOMENA IN SOCIETY†
Weidlich, W. (1971) · British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.2044-8317.1971.tb00470.x · Cited by 216
The role of network topology on extremism propagation with the relative agreement opinion dynamics
Amblard, F., & Deffuant, G. (2004) · Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications · doi:10.1016/j.physa.2004.06.102 · Cited by 216
Bifurcations and patterns in compromise processes
Ben-Naim, E., Krapivsky, P. L., & Redner, S. (2003) · Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena · doi:10.1016/s0167-2789(03)00171-4 · Cited by 199
Opinion Dynamics Driven by Various Ways of Averaging
Hegselmann, R., & Krause, U. (2005) · Computational Economics · doi:10.1007/s10614-005-6296-3 · Cited by 191
Cited by
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
Social Influence and the Collective Dynamics of Opinion Formation
Moussaïd, M., Kämmer, J. E., Analytis, P. P., & Neth, H. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0078433 · Cited by 407
Rai, V., & Robinson, S. A. (2015) · Environmental Modelling & Software · doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2015.04.014 · Cited by 335
Information cascades in complex networks
Jalili, M., & Perc, M. (2017) · Journal of Complex Networks · doi:10.1093/comnet/cnx019 · Cited by 248
Opinion Dynamics: Models, Extensions and External Effects
Sîrbu, A., Loreto, V., Servedio, V. D. P., & Tria, F. (2017) · Understanding Complex Systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-25658-0_17 · Cited by 186
Metadata
- Authors
- LORENZ, J.
- Venue
- International Journal of Modern Physics C
- Publisher
- World Scientific Pub Co Pte Lt
- Published
- 2007-12
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1819-1838
- ISSN
- 0129-1831 (ISSN-L)
- 1793-6586
- OpenAlex
- W2159918425
- Cited by
- 561
- References
- 24
- FWCI
- 9.63
- 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: CONTINUOUS OPINION DYNAMICS UNDER BOUNDED CONFIDENCE: A SURVEY. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1142/s0129183107011789
- The paper
- LORENZ, J. (2007). CONTINUOUS OPINION DYNAMICS UNDER BOUNDED CONFIDENCE: A SURVEY. International Journal of Modern Physics C. https://doi.org/10.1142/s0129183107011789
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.
