Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 47 references

Temperature-Noise Interplay in a Coupled Model of Opinion Dynamics

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read In the high-temperature limit, the critical line of the coupled opinion model obeys $T(p-a_q)=b_q$, linking temperature and noise as inverse measures; for $q=1$, $pT=1$.

desk verdict Solid mean-field paper with a clean exact high-T relation T(p-a)=b; just needs honest framing that for q>=4 the plotted line is the lower spinodal, not coexistence. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.07680 v3 pith:TDKY5NNA submitted 2025-06-09 cond-mat.stat-mech physics.soc-ph

Anna Chmiel , Julian Sienkiewicz This is my paper
classification cond-mat.stat-mechphysics.soc-ph PACS 05.50.+q89.65.-s05.70.Fh
keywords opiniondynamicsq-votermodelq-neighborIsingmultiplexnetworksphasetransitionstricriticalpointmean-fieldrateequationMonteCarlosimulation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper asks how two distinct sources of randomness in opinion dynamics—temperature-like conformity pressure and noise-like independence of choice—combine when an agent must satisfy both. The authors couple the q-neighbor Ising model (parameter $T$) with the q-voter model (parameter $p$) through an AND rule on a complete graph, and solve the resulting mean-field rate equation for the line in the $(p,T)$ plane where order is lost. Their central claim is that in the high-temperature limit this critical line obeys $T(p-a_q)=b_q$, with $a_q$ the critical noise of the stand-alone q-voter model; for a one-member lobby the exact line is $p=\tanh(1/T)$, reducing to $pT=1$ as $T\to\infty$. If the relation is right, it gives a simple quantitative bridge between social temperature and independence noise, and it shows which mechanism dominates as the lobby grows.

What carries the argument

The engine of the argument is the mean-field rate equation $F_q(m)=\frac{1-m}{2}\gamma_I^+(q,m,T)\gamma_v^+(q,m,p)-\frac{1+m}{2}\gamma_I^-(q,m,T)\gamma_v^-(q,m,p)=0$, formed by multiplying the flip probabilities of the q-Ising and q-voter dynamics (the AND rule) on a complete graph. Imposing $\partial F_q/\partial m=0$ at $m=0$ converts this equation into the explicit critical line $p^*_q(T)$ of Eq. (5); because $F_q$ is linear in $p$, the solution is straightforward, and expanding it in $\beta=1/T$ around $\beta=0$ yields $T(p-a_q)=b_q$. For even $q$ the sums in Eq. (5) are evaluated in closed form using Gaussian hypergeometric functions (Eq. D5), whose infinite-temperature limit gives the monolayer q-voter critical noise. A Landau effective potential $V_q(m)=-\int F_q(m)\,dm$ supplies the tricritical point and the stability classification of the solutions.

What would settle it

For $q=4$, build the effective potential $V_4(m)=-\int F_4(m)\,dm$, locate the coexistence boundary by a Maxwell equal-area construction, and compare the resulting $p_{\mathrm{co}}(T)$ with $p^*_4(T)$ from Eq. (5). If $p_{\mathrm{co}}(T)$ differs from $p^*_4(T)$ by more than the hysteresis width, then the reported relation is a spinodal law, not a phase-boundary law, and the claim that Eq. (6) gives the line dividing ordered and disordered phases would need qualification.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that the boundary between ordered and disordered phases of the coupled q-neighbor Ising / q-voter system is described, in the high-temperature regime, by $p^*_q(T) \approx a_q + b_q/T$, equivalently $T(p-a_q)=b_q$, where $a_q$ is the critical independence probability of the monolayer q-voter model and $b_q$ is fixed by the rate equation. For $q=1$ the exact boundary is $p^*_1(T)=\tanh(1/T)$, so the product $pT$ tends to $1$ at high temperature. The boundary is obtained by imposing $\partial F_q/\partial m=0$ at $m=0$ on the rate equation $F_q(m)=0$, which yields the explicit critical line $p^*_q(T)$ of Eq. (5) and, for even $q$, a closed form in Gaussian hypergeometric functions whose $T\to\infty$ limit recovers the monolayer q-voter result $2(q-1)/(2(q-1)+2^q)$. For $q=4$ the same framework locates a tricritical point $(T_{\mathrm{tri}}, p_{\mathrm{tri}})\approx(5.6331,0.4888)$ below which transitions are discontinuous and q-Ising-like and above which they are continuous and q-voter-like; for $q\ge 5$ bistability persists along the critical line, and for large $q$ the phase diagram is dominated by the temperature-like dynamics.

Load-bearing premise

The analysis treats the critical line as the stability limit of the disordered state, defined by $\partial F_q/\partial m=0$ at $m=0$; for lobby sizes $q\ge4$, where the transition is discontinuous and hysteresis appears, this is the lower spinodal rather than the true coexistence curve, so the simple relation $T(p-a_q)=b_q$ describes that spinodal and may not describe the phase boundary obtained by a Maxwell construction.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For $q=1$ the exact critical line is $p^*_1(T)=\tanh(1/T)$, so at high temperature the product $pT$ approaches $1$; a noise probability of order $1/T$ is exactly what offsets the temperature.
  • The coefficient pairs $(a_q,b_q)$ tabulated for $q=1,\ldots,6$ give a ready formula for locating the order–disorder boundary at high temperature for any lobby size.
  • For $q=4$, below $T_{\mathrm{tri}}\approx5.63$ the transition is discontinuous and controlled by the temperature-like layer, while above it the transition is continuous and controlled by the noise-like layer.
  • For $q=5$ and $q=6$ bistability survives along the critical line even at high temperature, and for $q=20$ the phase diagram is nearly vertical in $p$, so the Ising-like dynamics prevails except at very small $p$.
  • The hypergeometric closed form (D5) makes the critical line computable for any even $q$ without further simulation.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The law $T(p-a_q)=b_q$ suggests an operational equivalence the paper only hints at: at fixed high temperature, the offset $p-a_q$ is inversely proportional to $T$, so independence and temperature can be traded against each other along the boundary.
  • Because the criticality condition for $q\ge4$ is the lower spinodal, a Maxwell-construction coexistence curve would probably deviate from Eq. (6); checking that deviation would separate a spinodal law from a true phase-boundary law.
  • The hypergeometric formula may support a $q\to\infty$ asymptotic analysis of $a_q$ and $b_q$, turning the qualitative statement that q-Ising dynamics prevails for large lobbies into a quantitative scaling.
  • The OR-rule rate equation sketched in the Discussion suggests the linear form will not survive a change of update rule; testing OR coupling for $q=1$, where the system is predicted to stay disordered for all $p$ and $T$, would probe the robustness of the temperature–noise duality.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper analyzes a coupled opinion-dynamics model on a complete graph in which a q-Ising process (temperature-like parameter T) and a q-voter process (independence probability p) must both suggest a flip for the agent to change state (AND rule). The authors derive the mean-field rate equation F_q(m,p,T)=0, obtain the critical line p*_q(T) from Eq. (5), and show that in the high-temperature limit this line has the universal form T(p-a_q)=b_q, where a_q is the monolayer q-voter critical noise. Exact closed forms are given for q=1,2,3, a Landau analysis is provided for q=4 and q=5, a hypergeometric representation for even q is derived in Appendix D, and Monte Carlo simulations are compared with the analytical predictions for q=1,...,6 and q=20.

Significance. The central derivation is parameter-free and internally consistent: it starts from the microscopic flip probabilities, the limiting cases T→∞ reduce to the monolayer q-voter results, and p=1 reproduces the monolayer q-Ising spinodals. The high-temperature relation T(p-a_q)=b_q, together with the exact q=1 result pT=1, is a simple and useful bridge between temperature-like and noise-like parameters in multiplex opinion dynamics. The paper also provides explicit formulas for several q values and a hypergeometric closed form for even q, which are valuable reference results. The main weakness is that, for q≥4, the computed line is the lower spinodal rather than the coexistence curve, and this distinction is not consistently reflected in the abstract and phase diagrams.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract, Sec. II, Eq. (5), Fig. 4] The quantity p*_q(T) defined by Eq. (5) is obtained from the condition (∂F_q/∂m)|_{m=0}=0 in Eq. (4). For q≥4, where the coupled system exhibits discontinuous transitions and hysteresis, this condition locates the lower spinodal (instability of the disordered state), not the coexistence curve obtained by a Maxwell construction. The abstract's phrase "critical line dividing the ordered and disordered phases" is precise only for q≤3 and for q=4 above the tricritical point (T_tri≈5.63); for q=5, Appendix C itself states that the bistability region disappears only as T→∞, so the entire finite-T line is a spinodal. Since the central high-temperature relation T(p-a_q)=b_q is derived for this spinodal, the paper should consistently use the term "lower spinodal" (or otherwise clearly qualify the meaning) in the abstract, the main text, and the phase diagrams, or else show that the coexistence line shares the same high-temperature behavior. This is not purely terminological because it changes the physical interpretation of the phase diagrams in Fig. 4.
  2. [Appendix C, Eqs. (C2)-(C3)] The Landau analysis for q=5 is internally inconsistent as printed. The coefficient B_L^5(T,p) displayed in Eq. (C2) contains factors m^4 and m^6 that should not appear in Landau coefficients of V=A_L m^2+B_L m^4+C_L m^6. More importantly, substituting p=p*_5(T) into the displayed Eq. (C3) and evaluating at, e.g., T=10 and T=100 gives positive values of B_L^5, which would contradict the conclusion that the q=5 line is a spinodal for all finite T. On the other hand, the coefficient B5 of m^2 in the rate equation F5 in Eq. (B9), when used as B_L=-B5/4, yields a negative but much larger magnitude. The authors should correct the typographical errors in Eqs. (B9) and (C2)-(C3) and re-verify the sign and magnitude of B_L^5(T), since the claim that no finite-temperature tricritical point exists for q=5 depends directly on this quantity.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Figs. 2, 3, 5] The Monte Carlo data are shown without error bars or an indication of the number of independent runs. For a complete graph with N=2×10^5 the statistical error may be small, but explicit uncertainties would strengthen the comparison between simulation and the analytical curves.
  2. [Appendix D] The statement that restricting to even values of q is done "without losing the generality" is inaccurate: the hypergeometric derivation and Eq. (D5) apply only to even q. The paper gives explicit formulas for odd q only up to q=5, and the large-q analysis in Fig. 6 uses only even q. Please revise this sentence to state clearly that Eq. (D5) is derived for even q.
  3. [Appendix B, Eq. (B9)] The coefficient B5 in Eq. (B9) appears to be missing a numerical prefactor or contain a factor-of-1024 error when compared with the direct evaluation of F5 at a point on the critical line. Please double-check the displayed coefficients, as the same typo may affect the Landau expression in Appendix C.
  4. [Sec. III C] The sentence "A notable difference between q=3 and = 1, 2" should read "between q=3 and q=1,2".
  5. [Appendix D title and Ref. [31]] There are several typos: the appendix title reads "crtitical" instead of "critical", and the GitHub link in Ref. [31] says "avaialable" instead of "available".

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the critical line and its high-temperature linearization follow from the stated microscopic rates and rate equation with no fitted parameters.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained. Starting from the microscopic flip probabilities gamma_v^+ and gamma_I^+ (Eqs. 1-2), the AND-rule rate equation (Eq. 3), and the marginal-stability condition (Eq. 4), the critical noise p*_q(T) is obtained as an explicit algebraic solution (Eq. 5). The high-temperature relation T(p-a_q)=b_q (Eq. 6) is a Taylor expansion of this same expression around beta=0, with a_q and b_q computed as limits and expansion coefficients, not fitted to data. The q=1 result p*_1(T)=tanh(1/T) and pT=1 follow from exact factorization of the rate equation. The limits T->infinity and p=1 reproduce the monolayer q-voter and q-Ising critical values, but these are consistency checks against prior literature, not inputs that force the result. Monte Carlo simulations are independent verifications of the analytic expressions. The possible objection that, for q>=4, Eq. (4) defines the lower spinodal rather than the coexistence curve is a claim-precision issue about the object being labeled 'critical line'; it does not amount to circular reasoning, since no prediction is equivalent by construction to an input parameter or to a self-citation chain.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model introduces no free parameters fitted to data; all quantities (a_q, b_q, tricritical coordinates) are derived from the rate equation. The main model assumptions are the complete-graph mean-field description, the linear-stability criterion for the critical line, and the AND coupling rule.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The infinite-N dynamics on a complete graph is exactly described by the rate equation F_q(m)=0 with flip probabilities γ_I and γ_v.
    Sec. II, Eq. (3) uses the product of probabilities from independently selected q-lobbies; this assumes the complete-graph mean-field limit and independence of the two dynamics in one time step.
  • standard math The stability of the disordered state is determined by ∂F_q/∂m at m=0 equals zero, which yields the critical line even where the transition is discontinuous.
    Sec. II, Eq. (4); this is the standard linear stability criterion, but for first-order transitions it identifies the spinodal, not the coexistence curve.
  • domain assumption The AND rule (both dynamics must suggest a flip) is the coupling mechanism.
    Sec. II and Fig. 1; results depend on this coupling, and OR rule would give different behavior (discussed in Sec. VI).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Temperature-Noise Interplay in a Coupled Model of Opinion Dynamics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TDKY5NNA

@misc{pith2026250607680,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Temperature-Noise Interplay in a Coupled Model of Opinion Dynamics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TDKY5NNA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.07680}
}
abstract

We consider a coupled system mimicking opinion formation under the influence of a group of $q$ neighbors ($q$-lobby) that consists of an Ising part governed by temperature-like parameter $T$ and a voter dynamics parameterized by noise probability $p$ (independence of choice). Using rigorous analytical calculations backed by extensive Monte Carlo simulations, we examine the interplay between these two quantities. Based on the theory of phase transitions, we derive the relation between $T$ and $p$ at the critical line dividing the ordered and disordered phases, which takes a very simple and generic form $T(p-a)=b$ in the high temperature limit. For specific lobby sizes, we show where the temperature and noise are balanced, and we hint that for large $q$, the temperature-like dynamics prevails.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.07680 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematic representation of the examined model [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Top row: solutions of the rate equation (3) for (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Top row: solutions of the rate equation (3) for (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: f. However, when considering the behavior of the coupled system for larger values of q, we note that in the mono￾FIG. 5. Results for q = 20. (a) Solution for the rate equa￾tion F20 = 0 (b) Phase diagram for q = 20. (c) Compar￾ison of analytical results for q = 20 and p…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Results for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Higher values of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Magnetization [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Effective potential [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Castellano, S

    C. Castellano, S. Fortunato, and V. Loreto, Statistical physics of social dynamics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 591 (2009)

    2009

  2. [2]

    Jusup, P

    M. Jusup, P. Holme, K. Kanazawa, M. Takayasu, I. Romi´ c, Z. Wang, S. Geˇ cek, T. Lipi´ c, B. Podobnik, L. Wang, W. Luo, T. Klanjˇ sˇ cek, J. Fan, S. Boccaletti, and M. Perc, Social physics, Phys. Rep. 948, 1 (2022)

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    D. B. Bahr and E. Passerini, Statistical mechanics of opinion formation and collective behavior: Micro- sociology, Journal of Mathematical Sociology 23, 1 (1998)

    work page 1998

  4. [4]

    Kacperski and J

    K. Kacperski and J. A. Ho lyst, Opinion formation model with strong leader and external impact: a mean field approach, Physica A 269, 511 (1999)

    work page 1999

  5. [5]

    Korbel, S

    J. Korbel, S. D. Lindner, T. M. Pham, R. Hanel, and S. Thurner, Homophily-based social group formation in a spin glass self-assembly framework, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 057401 (2023)

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    Galesic, W

    M. Galesic, W. B. de Bruin, J. Dalege, S. L. Feld, F. Kreuter, H. Olsson, D. Prelec, D. L. Stein, and T. van der Does, Human social sensing is an untapped resource for computational social science, Nature 595, 214 (2021)

    work page 2021

  7. [7]

    Sznajd-Weron, A

    K. Sznajd-Weron, A. J¸ edrzejewski, and B. Kami´ nska, To- ward understanding of the social hysteresis: Insights from agent-based modeling, Perspectives on Psychological Sci- ence 19, 511 (2024)

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    J. A. Ho lyst, Why does history surprise us?, Journal of Computational Science 73, 102137 (2023)

    work page 2023

Show all 47 references
  1. [9]

    Nyczka, K

    P. Nyczka, K. Sznajd-Weron, and J. Cis lo, Phase tran- 13 sitions in the q-voter model with two types of stochastic driving, Phys. Rev. E 86, 011105 (2012)

    2012

  2. [10]

    J¸ edrzejewski and K

    A. J¸ edrzejewski and K. Sznajd-Weron, Statistical physics of opinion formation: Is it a spoof?, Comptes Rendus Physique 20, 244 (2019)

    2019

  3. [11]

    For the sake of clarity of presentation, we further re- frain from giving full forms of relevant rate equations and critical lines and present them in detail in Appendix B

    and that the q-voter model exhibits discontinuous phase transitions for q ≥ 6 as compared to the q-Ising one, where it happens already for q ≥ 4 (see Table I for an overview), coupling brings varied results for different q. For the sake of clarity of presentation, we further r...

  4. [12]

    M. W. Macy, B. K. Szymanski, and J. A. Ho lyst, The ising model celebrates a century of interdisciplinary con- tributions, npj Complexity 1, 10 (2024)

    2024

  5. [13]

    Fern´ andez-Gracia, K

    J. Fern´ andez-Gracia, K. Suchecki, J. J. Ramasco, M. S. Miguel, and V. M. Egu ´ ıluz, Is the voter model a model for voters?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 158701 (2014)

    2014

  6. [14]

    J¸ edrzejewski, A

    A. J¸ edrzejewski, A. Chmiel, and K. Sznajd-Weron, Os- cillating hysteresis in the q-neighbor ising model, Phys. Rev. E 92, 052105 (2015)

    2015

  7. [15]

    Aiudi, R

    R. Aiudi, R. Burioni, and A. Vezzani, Critical dynamics of long-range models on dynamical l´ evy lattices, Phys. Rev. B 107, 224204 (2023)

    2023

  8. [16]

    Jacob and S

    D. Jacob and S. Banisch, Polarization in social me- dia: A virtual worlds-based approach, JASSS 26, 10.18564/jasss.5170 (2023)

    2023 doi

  9. [17]

    Park and J

    J.-M. Park and J. D. Noh, Tricritical behavior of nonequi- librium ising spins in fluctuating environments, Phys. Rev. E 95, 042106 (2017)

    2017

  10. [18]

    K. K. Denton, U. Liberman, and M. W. Feldman, On ran- domly changing conformity bias in cultural transmission, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 118, e2107204118 (2021)

    2021

  11. [19]

    S. E. Asch, Opinions and social pressure, Scientific Amer- ican 193, 31 (1955)

    1955

  12. [20]

    Iacomini and P

    E. Iacomini and P. Vellucci, Contrarian effect in opin- ion forming: Insights from greta thunberg phenomenon, Journal of Mathematical Sociology 47, 123 (2023)

    2023

  13. [21]

    Chmiel and K

    A. Chmiel and K. Sznajd-Weron, Phase transitions in the q-voter model with noise on a duplex clique, Phys. Rev. E 92, 052812 (2015)

    2015

  14. [22]

    no hypocrisy rule

    that have proven that the addition of a level dra- matically changes the behavior of the system, e.g., while for the monolayer q-Ising we have second or first order phase transitions between the ordered and disorder phase depending on the lobby size, in the q-Ising duplex only...

    2025 arXiv

  15. [23]

    S. E. Asch, Studies of independence and conformity: I. a minority of one against a unanimous majority, Psycho- logical Monographs: General and Applied 70, 1 (1956)

    1956

  16. [24]

    Choi and K.-I

    J. Choi and K.-I. Goh, Majority-vote dynamics on mul- tiplex networks with two layers, New Journal of Physics 21, 035005 (2019)

    2019

  17. [25]

    Chmiel, J

    A. Chmiel, J. Sienkiewicz, and K. Sznajd-Weron, Tri- criticality in the q -neighbor ising model on a partially duplex clique, Phys. Rev. E 96, 062137 (2017)

    2017

  18. [26]

    K.-M. Lee, C. D. Brummitt, and K.-I. Goh, Threshold cascades with response heterogeneity in multiplex net- works, Phys. Rev. E 90, 062816 (2014)

    2014

  19. [27]

    Cinelli, G

    M. Cinelli, G. D. F. Morales, A. Galeazzi, W. Quattro- ciocchi, and M. Starnini, The echo chamber effect on so- cial media, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci- ences 118, e2023301118 (2021)

    2021

  20. [28]

    Gradowski and A

    T. Gradowski and A. Krawiecki, Pair approximation for the q-voter model with independence on multiplex net- works, Phys. Rev. E 102, 022314 (2020)

    2020

  21. [29]

    Chmiel, J

    A. Chmiel, J. Sienkiewicz, A. Fronczak, and P. Fronczak, A Veritable Zoology of Successive Phase Transitions in the Asymmetric q-Voter Model on Multiplex Networks, Entropy 22, 1018 (2020)

    2020

  22. [30]

    Krawiecki and T

    A. Krawiecki and T. Gradowski, q-neighbor ising model on multiplex networks with partial overlap of nodes, Phys. Rev. E 108, 014307 (2023)

    2023

  23. [31]

    Baumann, P

    F. Baumann, P. Lorenz-Spreen, I. M. Sokolov, and M. Starnini, Modeling echo chambers and polarization dynamics in social networks, Physical Review Letters 124, 10.1103/physrevlett.124.048301 (2020)

    2020 doi

  24. [32]

    L. G. Gajewski, J. Sienkiewicz, and J. A. Ho lyst, Tran- sitions between polarization and radicalization in a tem- poral bilayer echo-chamber model, Phys. Rev. E 105, 024125 (2022)

    2022

  25. [33]

    Saito, M

    M. Saito, M. Watanabe, N. Kurita, A. Matsuo, K. Kindo, M. Avdeev, H. O. Jeschke, and H. Tanaka, Successive phase transitions and magnetization plateau in the spin- 1 triangular-lattice antiferromagnet ba 2la2nite2o12 with small easy-axis anisotropy, Phys. Rev. B 100, 064417 (2019)

    2019

  26. [34]

    Data for the numerical simulations presented in figs 2, 3 and 5 are avaialable at github repository., https://github.com/j-sienkiewicz/qvi

  27. [35]

    Chmiel and J

    A. Chmiel and J. Sienkiewicz, q-neighbor ising model on a polarized network, Phys. Rev. E 110, 064312 (2024)

    2024

  28. [36]

    Chen, M.-B

    J. Chen, M.-B. Hu, and M. Li, Traffic-driven epidemic spreading in multiplex networks, Phys. Rev. E 101, 012301 (2020)

    2020

  29. [37]

    Granell, S

    C. Granell, S. G´ omez, and A. Arenas, Dynamical inter- play between awareness and epidemic spreading in mul- tiplex networks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 128701 (2013)

    2013

  30. [38]

    Czaplicka, R

    A. Czaplicka, R. Toral, and M. San Miguel, Competi- tion of simple and complex adoption on interdependent networks, Phys. Rev. E 94, 062301 (2016)

    2016

  31. [39]

    Therefore, although a multi-state version of the problem considered in this study might be psychologically rele- vant, it cannot be achieved in a straightforward way

    versus moving away from the q-lobby opinion [40]. Therefore, although a multi-state version of the problem considered in this study might be psychologically rele- vant, it cannot be achieved in a straightforward way. As it concerns the underlying topology, the cou- pled model ...

    1913

  32. [40]

    Jankowski and A

    R. Jankowski and A. Chmiel, Role of time scales in the coupled epidemic-opinion dynamics on multiplex net- works, Entropy 24, 105 (2022)

    2022

  33. [41]

    K. T. Grado´ n, J. A. Ho lyst, W. R. Moy, J. Sienkiewicz, and K. Suchecki, Countering misinformation: A multidisciplinary approach, Big Data & Society 8, 20539517211013848 (2021)

    2021

  34. [42]

    Nowak and K

    B. Nowak and K. Sznajd-Weron, Switching from a contin- uous to a discontinuous phase transition under quenched disorder, Phys. Rev. E 106, 014125 (2022)

    2022

  35. [43]

    Lipiecki and K

    A. Lipiecki and K. Sznajd-Weron, Polarization in the three-state q-voter model with anticonformity and bounded confidence, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 165, 112809 (2022)

    2022

  36. [44]

    R. B. Potts, Some generalized order-disorder transforma- tions, Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philo- sophical Society 48, 106–109 (1952)

    1952

  37. [45]

    Jedrzejewski, Pair approximation for the q-voter model with independence on complex networks, Phys

    A. Jedrzejewski, Pair approximation for the q-voter model with independence on complex networks, Phys. Rev. E 95, 012307 (2017)

    2017

  38. [46]

    Abramowitz and I

    M. Abramowitz and I. A. Stegun, Handbook of Mathe- matical Functions with Formulas, Graphs, and Mathe- matical Tables, ninth dover printing, tenth gpo printing ed. (Dover, New York, 1964)

    1964

  39. [47]

    Wolfram Research Hypergeomet- ric2F1 function specific values, https://functions.wolfram.com/HypergeometricFunctions/Hypergeometric2F1/03/03/01/0006/, [Accessed: 27 July 2025]

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.