Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 46 references

The fractal geometry of opinion formation

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Contrarian opinion dynamics can make the group's equilibrium distribution fractal, and the fractal dimension has a closed-form equation.

desk verdict New family of fractal stationary laws for a contrarian opinion model, but the finite-N to PDE link is only rigorous when the two update rates are equal. read the letter →

arxiv 2601.21023 v2 pith:QZJNUNIL submitted 2026-01-28 math.PR

Fei Cao , Roberto Cortez This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.PR MSC 60K3528A8035Q84
keywords opiniondynamicscontrarianbehaviormean-fieldlimitfragmentationBernoulliconvolutionfractalsupportHausdorffdimensionpropagationofchaos
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 studies a crowd of agents whose opinions live in [-1,1] and who, on meeting, move away from the opinion they hear. The authors prove that in the infinite-population limit this contrarian interaction is described by a simple kinetic PDE, and that its solution converges to a unique equilibrium. The central result is that when the two update strengths μ_- and μ_+ sum to more than 1, the equilibrium opinion distribution is concentrated on a Cantor-like fractal set rather than spread over the interval. Its Hausdorff dimension is the unique solution of (1-μ_-)^D + (1-μ_+)^D = 1; when the two strengths are equal, the equilibrium is exactly the classical Bernoulli convolution. A sympathetic reader should care because the model gives a minimal mathematical mechanism by which perpetual disagreement and opinion fragmentation can be an equilibrium outcome, not a transient.

What carries the argument

The stationary law is characterized by a distributional fixed point Z∞ = B((1-μ_+)Z∞ + μ_+) + (1-B)((1-μ_-)Z∞ - μ_-), where B is Bernoulli with parameter (1-m∞)/2 and m∞ = (√μ_+ - √μ_-)/(√μ_+ + √μ_-). Iterating this identity shows the support S is the self-similar set S = ((1-μ_+)S + μ_+) ∪ ((1-μ_-)S - μ_-); when μ_- + μ_+ > 1 the two branches are disjoint, so standard self-similar set theory gives the Hausdorff dimension. The rest of the argument is the mean-field passage: propagation-of-chaos bounds connect the finite system to the PDE, and coupling estimates give convergence to equilibrium.

What would settle it

Fix μ_- = 0.4 and μ_+ = 0.8, run the N-agent process to very large times for large N, and check whether the empirical distribution concentrates on the self-similar set predicted by the dimension equation (1-μ_-)^D + (1-μ_+)^D = 1. If the finite-N stationary laws converge to a different limit, or if the empirical support's dimension does not match D, the central claim that the PDE fractal describes the long-run opinion distribution is wrong.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that anticonformist, or contrarian, interactions are enough to produce opinion fragmentation as the stable long-run state of a large population. Concretely, it establishes that the mean-field limit of the N-agent process is a nonlinear jump process whose law solves a Boltzmann-type PDE; for any parameters μ_- and μ_+ in (0,1], the PDE has a unique stationary distribution ρ∞, and solutions converge to it with quantitative rates. When μ_- + μ_+ > 1, the support of ρ∞ is the attractor of two contracting maps and hence a fractal of Hausdorff dimension D solving the dimension equation; in the symmetric case ρ∞ is the Bernoulli convolution. The paper thus extends a known link betw

Load-bearing premise

The finite-agent system converges to the mean-field PDE uniformly in time; this is proved only for μ_- = μ_+, while for μ_- ≠ μ_+ the propagation-of-chaos bound grows like e^{(μ_-+μ_+)t}, and Section 2.3 states that even finite-N stationarity was not proved.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If μ_- + μ_+ > 1, the equilibrium opinion distribution has zero Lebesgue measure: a positive fraction of opinion space is never occupied, so in infinite populations some opinions are unobtainable.
  • The stronger the contrarian pull (larger μ's), the smaller the Hausdorff dimension, so D provides a quantitative index of fragmentation.
  • In the symmetric case μ_- = μ_+, the equilibrium is the classical Bernoulli convolution, so known results about Bernoulli convolutions transfer to this opinion model.
  • The convergence estimates imply that even in the asymmetric case the PDE solution approaches the fractal distribution at a quantified rate, justifying numerical observation of the fractal at large times.
  • Because the contrarian model admits a unique nontrivial equilibrium for every μ_- and μ_+, contrarianism sustains persistent opinion diversity more robustly than conformism.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the mean-field equilibrium transfers to finite systems — which the paper does not prove in the asymmetric case — then opinion gaps are a genuine infinite-population phenomenon, and large finite populations should show the fractal support only approximately, with finite-N fluctuations filling the gaps.
  • The asymmetric family (ρ∞) may be worth studying as a generalized Bernoulli convolution in its own right: the boundary case μ_- + μ_+ = 1, where the paper's numerics show increasingly irregular histograms, is a natural target for dimension and absolute-continuity analysis.
  • A direct testable extension is to run agent simulations with μ_- ≠ μ_+ and estimate the dimension of the empirical support; matching D from the dimension equation would confirm that the PDE fractal is visible in finite populations, while a mismatch would pinpoint the missing uniform-in-time propagation of chaos.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a multi-agent opinion dynamics model on [-1,1] with an 'anticonformity' update rule: in each pairwise encounter the listener moves away from the speaker's stated extreme by proportions μ+ or μ-. The main results are: (i) a finite-time propagation of chaos bound for the N-agent system (Theorem 1); (ii) a uniform-in-time propagation of chaos and long-time estimates in the symmetric case μ+ = μ- (Theorem 5, Proposition 6); (iii) quantitative convergence of the mean-field PDE to a unique stationary law in Wasserstein and Fourier metrics, in both symmetric and asymmetric regimes (Theorems 10, 11, 13, 14); and (iv) the headline result (Theorem 15) that for μ+ + μ- > 1 the stationary law is supported on a Cantor-type fractal set of Hausdorff dimension D solving (1-μ+)^D + (1-μ-)^D = 1, recovering and generalizing the Bernoulli convolution. Numerical experiments illustrate the fractal CDFs in the supercritical case and the apparently absolutely continuous behavior in the subcritical case.

Significance. If correct, the paper makes a surprising and attractive connection between opinion dynamics and Bernoulli convolutions, and it provides a new family of self-similar equilibrium measures in the asymmetric case. The explicit first-moment ODE, the second-moment estimate in Corollary 4, and the coupling arguments in Theorems 5 and 11 are clear and useful. The numerical simulations are extensive and appear to confirm the predicted fractal structure. At the same time, the manuscript currently falls short of fully supporting the agent-level interpretation of the fractal equilibrium: the only bridge from finite N to the stationary law in the asymmetric case is a finite-time propagation-of-chaos bound that diverges exponentially in t, and Section 2.3 explicitly states that finite-N stationarity was not proved even in the symmetric case. The PDE-level results are plausible, but several load-bearing proofs are omitted or delegated to the authors' prior work, so the present form is not yet self-contained.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 2.1, Theorem 1] Theorem 1 is the only quantitative mean-field limit in the general asymmetric regime, but its proof is omitted with the sentence 'follows along the same lines as the one given in [8]'. The update rule here (1.1) differs from that in [8], and m_t is time-dependent when μ+ ≠ μ-, so a direct reduction is not automatic. Since this theorem is the rigorous basis for the mean-field PDE (2.6), the full proof, or at least a precise statement of the analogous theorem with all constants checked, is required.
  2. [Section 4, Eq. (4.1)] Existence and uniqueness of the stationary law ρ∞ is asserted via a 'simple contraction argument (which we omit)'. This object is the target of all the convergence theorems (Theorems 10, 11, 13, 14) and the input to Theorem 15. Without a proof of existence and uniqueness, the convergence results are statements about an object that is not rigorously constructed. Provide the metric and contractive estimate, including the asymmetric case μ+ ≠ μ-.
  3. [Section 3, Theorems 13 and 14] The proofs of Theorems 13 and 14 are omitted. Theorem 14 is the only convergence-to-equilibrium result for the asymmetric case, and Theorem 13 gives the Fourier-metric analogue in the symmetric case. These are central to the paper's claim of convergence to the fractal equilibrium. Please include the full arguments, or at least a complete proof sketch with all constants and the treatment of the asymmetric mean dynamics, rather than referring to 'the same lines'.
  4. [Sections 2.2-2.3 and Conclusion] The abstract, introduction, and conclusion present ρ∞ as the long-run opinion profile of the multi-agent system. For μ+ ≠ μ- this link is not established: Theorem 1 is finite-time with bound C/√N e^{(μ+ + μ-)t}, and Theorem 5 is restricted to μ+ = μ-. Section 2.3 explicitly says that finite-N stationarity was not proved ('we were not quite able to prove it') even in the symmetric case. Thus the interchange of t→∞ and N→∞ is missing exactly in the regime that contains the new fractal family. Either prove a uniform-in-time asymmetric propagation of chaos estimate, or restrict the fragmentation claims to the mean-field PDE and clearly label the agent-level interpretation as a numerically supported conjecture.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 3, after Theorem 10] 'collusion gain operator' should be 'collision gain operator'.
  2. [Figures 2 and 3] The inline labels for μ in the figure captions appear corrupted (e.g. '7! = 0:6'); please fix the typography so that parameter values are legible.
  3. [Equation (2.3)] The expression for C has a removable singularity when the initial mean m0 equals m∞; please state the limiting formula or treat that case separately.
  4. [Introduction] The statement 'by the obvious symmetry, we can assume μ- ≤ μ+' deserves a brief explanation: swapping +1 and -1 maps (μ-, μ+) to (μ+, μ-).
  5. [General references] The arXiv abstract cites [9] and [24,51], while the body and reference list use [8] and [23,44]; make the numbering consistent.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the fractal dimension result is a genuine derivation from the stationary fixed-point equation, and the self-citations are not load-bearing reductions.

full rationale

Walking the derivation chain: the agent model (1.1) leads to the mean-field SDE (2.2) and the Boltzmann PDE (2.6); stationarity gives the distributional fixed point (4.1). Theorem 15 derives the support self-similarity (4.3) from (4.1) and then applies standard self-similar set dimension theory (Hutchinson [31]), so the Hausdorff dimension D is computed, not assumed. The symmetric case reduces to (4.2), the Bernoulli convolution fixed point; recovering a known object in a special case is a specialization, not a definitional tautology. The parameters mu+ and mu- are model inputs, and m_infinity is computed from the explicit ODE (2.3), not fitted to the target fractal dimension. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The self-citations that do occur—Theorem 1's proof being 'along the same lines' as [8], and the prior identification of the symmetric stationary law in [8]—are references to independent published work and are not used to bypass a step in the paper's own derivation; the paper supplies its own convergence proofs (Theorems 5, 10, 11, 14). The acknowledged gap that finite-N stationarity is not proved ('we were not quite able to prove it') and the finite-time-only propagation of chaos in the asymmetric case are correctness/completeness limitations, not circularity. Therefore no circular step is exhibited, and the appropriate score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No parameters are fitted to data; μ_- and μ_+ are model inputs. The derivation leans on standard probability and fractal facts and, for one theorem, on the authors' own prior paper [8] with the proof omitted.

free parameters (2)
  • μ_-
    User-specified contraction step toward -1; all results are parameterized by it, no data fitting.
  • μ_+
    User-specified contraction step toward +1; fractal regime is μ_- + μ_+ > 1, no data fitting.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Finite-time propagation of chaos bound from [8] transfers to model (1.1); Theorem 1's proof is omitted.
    After Theorem 1: 'The proof follows along the same lines as the one given in [8] ... so we omit it here.'
  • ad hoc to paper Stochastic fixed-point equation (4.1) has a unique solution ρ∞ via an omitted contraction argument.
    Section 4: 'By a simple contraction argument (which we omit), it can be seen that there exists a unique solution...'
  • standard math Hutchinson's self-similar attractor dimension formula applies to the support equation (4.3).
    Theorem 15 cites [31] for dimension of self-similar sets; maps are contractions and disjoint when μ_- + μ_+ > 1.
  • standard math Joint convexity of W2² and d1 distances holds for the Euler-splitting argument.
    Theorems 10 and 13 rely on results of [14].
  • domain assumption The nonlinear mean-field SDE (2.2) has a unique strong solution.
    Section 2.1 states this without proof.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The fractal geometry of opinion formation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QZJNUNIL

@misc{pith2026260121023,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The fractal geometry of opinion formation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QZJNUNIL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2601.21023}
}
abstract

In this manuscript, we introduce and study a variant of the agent-based opinion dynamics proposed in a recent work [9], within the framework of an interacting multi-agent system, where agents are assumed to interact with each other and update their opinions after each pairwise encounter. Specifically, our opinion model involves a large crowd of $N$ indistinguishable agents, each characterized by an opinion value ranging within the interval $[-1,1]$. At each update time, two agents are picked uniformly at random and the opinion of one agent will either shift by a proportion $\mu \in (0,1]$ towards $+1$, or by a proportion $\lambda \in (0,1]$ towards $-1$, with probabilities depending on the other agent's opinion. We rigorously derive the mean-field limit PDE that governs the large-population limit of the agent-based model and present several quantitative results demonstrating convergence to the unique equilibrium distribution. Remarkably, for a suitable choice of model parameters, the long-term equilibrium opinion profile displays a striking self-similar structure that generalizes the celebrated Bernoulli convolution, a topic extensively studied in the context of fractal geometry [24,51]. These findings also enhance our understanding of the opinion fragmentation phenomenon and may provide valuable insights for the development of more sophisticated models in future research.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.21023 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Schematic illustration of the limiting procedure carried out for the study the multi [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Left: Monte Carlo simulation of the agent-based opinion model with N = 5 · 106 agents and time t = 10, for three pairs of values of (µ−, µ+) such that µ− + µ+ > 1. In each plot the (empirical) cumulative distribution function (CDF) is displayed, which is a good approximation of the CDF of ρ∞. Right: Evolution of the CDF, computed by solving numerically the mean-field PDE (2.6), for the same three pairs (µ−, µ+). The… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Monte Carlo simulation of the agent-based opinion model with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references

  1. [8]

    Fractal opinions among interacting agents.SIAM Journal on Applied Dynamical Systems,24(2):1529–1552, 2025

    Fei Cao, and Roberto Cortez. Fractal opinions among interacting agents.SIAM Journal on Applied Dynamical Systems,24(2):1529–1552, 2025

    2025

  2. [1]

    Social affect and political disagreement on social media

    Matthew Barnidge. Social affect and political disagreement on social media. Social Media + Society,4(3):2056305118797721, 2018

    2018

  3. [2]

    Opinion dynamics: rise and fall of political parties.Europhysics Letters,69(5):671–677, 2005

    Eli Ben-Naim. Opinion dynamics: rise and fall of political parties.Europhysics Letters,69(5):671–677, 2005

    2005

  4. [3]

    Bobylev, and Giuseppe Toscani

    Alexander V. Bobylev, and Giuseppe Toscani. On the generalization of the Boltzmann H-theorem for a spatially homogeneous Maxwell gas.Journal of Mathematical Physics,33(7):2578–2586, 1992

    1992

  5. [4]

    The Bennati-Dragulescu-Yakovenko model in the continuous setting: PDE derivation and long-time behavior.arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.06101, 2025

    Fei Cao, and Nadia Loy. The Bennati-Dragulescu-Yakovenko model in the continuous setting: PDE derivation and long-time behavior.arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.06101, 2025

    arXiv 2025

  6. [5]

    Derivation of wealth distributions from biased exchange of money.Kinetic & Related Models,16(5):764–794, 2023

    Fei Cao, and Sebastien Motsch. Derivation of wealth distributions from biased exchange of money.Kinetic & Related Models,16(5):764–794, 2023

    2023

  7. [6]

    Entropy dissipation and propagation of chaos for the uniform reshuffling model.Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences,33(4):829–875, 2023

    Fei Cao, Pierre-Emannuel Jabin, and Sebastien Motsch. Entropy dissipation and propagation of chaos for the uniform reshuffling model.Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences,33(4):829–875, 2023. REFERENCES 27

    2023

  8. [7]

    Explicit decay rate for the Gini index in the repeated averaging model

    Fei Cao. Explicit decay rate for the Gini index in the repeated averaging model. Mathematical Methods in the Applied Sciences,46(4):3583–3596, 2023

    2023

Show all 46 references
  1. [9]

    From interacting agents to Boltzmann- Gibbs distribution of money.Nonlinearity,37(12):125020, 2024

    Fei Cao, and Pierre-Emannuel Jabin. From interacting agents to Boltzmann- Gibbs distribution of money.Nonlinearity,37(12):125020, 2024

    2024

  2. [10]

    Fei Cao.K-averaging agent-based model: propagation of chaos and conver- gence to equilibrium.Journal of Statistical Physics,184(2):18, 2021

    2021

  3. [11]

    The iterative persuasion-polarization opinion dynamics and its mean-field analysis.SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 85(4):1596–1620, 2025

    Fei Cao, and Stephanie Reed. The iterative persuasion-polarization opinion dynamics and its mean-field analysis.SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 85(4):1596–1620, 2025

    2025

  4. [12]

    Uncovering a two-phase dynamics from a dollar exchange model with bank and debt.SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 83(5):1872–1891, 2023

    Fei Cao, and Sebastien Motsch. Uncovering a two-phase dynamics from a dollar exchange model with bank and debt.SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 83(5):1872–1891, 2023

    2023

  5. [13]

    Uniform propagation of chaos for a dollar exchange econophysics model.European Journal of Applied Mathematics, 36(1):27–39, 2025

    Fei Cao, and Roberto Cortez. Uniform propagation of chaos for a dollar exchange econophysics model.European Journal of Applied Mathematics, 36(1):27–39, 2025

    2025

  6. [14]

    Carrillo, and Giuseppe Toscani

    José A. Carrillo, and Giuseppe Toscani. Contractive probability metrics and asymptotic behavior of dissipative kinetic equations.Riv. Mat. Univ. Parma, 6(7):75–198, 2007

    2007

  7. [15]

    Statistical physics of social dynamics.Reviews of modern physics,81(2):591, 2009

    Claudio Castellano, Santo Fortunato, and Vittorio Loreto. Statistical physics of social dynamics.Reviews of modern physics,81(2):591, 2009

    2009

  8. [16]

    Quantitative propagation of chaos for generalizedKacparticlesystems.The Annals of Applied Probability,26(2):892– 916, 2016

    Roberto Cortez, and Joaquin Fontbona. Quantitative propagation of chaos for generalizedKacparticlesystems.The Annals of Applied Probability,26(2):892– 916, 2016

    2016

  9. [17]

    Uniform propagation of chaos for Kac’s 1D particle system

    Roberto Cortez. Uniform propagation of chaos for Kac’s 1D particle system. Journal of Statistical Physics,165:1102–1113, 2016

    2016

  10. [18]

    Quantitative uniform propagation of chaos for Maxwell molecules.Communications in Mathematical Physics, 357(3):913–941, 2018

    Roberto Cortez, and Joaquin Fontbona. Quantitative uniform propagation of chaos for Maxwell molecules.Communications in Mathematical Physics, 357(3):913–941, 2018

    2018

  11. [19]

    Social media filtering and democracy: Effects of social media news use and uncivil politi- cal discussions on social media unfriending.Computers in Human Behavior, 120:106759, 2021

    Manuel Goyanes, Porismita Borah, and Homero Gil de Zúñiga. Social media filtering and democracy: Effects of social media news use and uncivil politi- cal discussions on social media unfriending.Computers in Human Behavior, 120:106759, 2021. REFERENCES 28

    2021

  12. [20]

    Mixing beliefs among interacting agents.Advances in Complex Systems, 3(01n04):87–98, 2000

    Guillaume Deffuant, David Neau, Frederic Amblard, and Gérard Weisbuch. Mixing beliefs among interacting agents.Advances in Complex Systems, 3(01n04):87–98, 2000

    2000

  13. [21]

    Macroscopic limits of the Boltzmann equation: a review.Mod- eling and computational methods for kinetic equations, pp

    Pierre Degond. Macroscopic limits of the Boltzmann equation: a review.Mod- eling and computational methods for kinetic equations, pp. 3–57, 2004

    2004

  14. [22]

    A Boltzmann-type approach to the formation of wealth distribution curves.Available at SSRN 1281404, 2008

    Bertram Düring, Daniel Matthes, and Giuseppe Toscani. A Boltzmann-type approach to the formation of wealth distribution curves.Available at SSRN 1281404, 2008

    2008

  15. [23]

    On a family of symmetric Bernoulli convolutions.American Jour- nal of Mathematics,61(4):974–976, 1939

    Paul Erdös. On a family of symmetric Bernoulli convolutions.American Jour- nal of Mathematics,61(4):974–976, 1939

    1939

  16. [24]

    Gabetta, Giuseppe Toscani, and Bernt Wennberg

    G. Gabetta, Giuseppe Toscani, and Bernt Wennberg. Metrics for probabil- ity distributions and the trend to equilibrium for solutions of the Boltzmann equation.Journal of Statistical Physics,81:901–934, 1995

    1995

  17. [25]

    Sociophysics: A new ap- proach of sociological collective behavior.The Journal of Mathematical Soci- ology,9(1):1–13, 1982

    Serge Galam, Yuval Gefen, and Yonathan Shapir. Sociophysics: A new ap- proach of sociological collective behavior.The Journal of Mathematical Soci- ology,9(1):1–13, 1982

    1982

  18. [26]

    Fourier-based dis- tances and Berry-Esseen like inequalities for smooth densities.Monatshefte für Mathematik,135:115–136, 2002

    Thierry Goudon, Stéphane Junca, and Giuseppe Toscani. Fourier-based dis- tances and Berry-Esseen like inequalities for smooth densities.Monatshefte für Mathematik,135:115–136, 2002

    2002

  19. [27]

    Stochastic particle approximations for gen- eralized Boltzmann models and convergence estimates.The Annals of Proba- bility,25(1):115–132, 1997

    Carl Graham, and Sylvie Méléard. Stochastic particle approximations for gen- eralized Boltzmann models and convergence estimates.The Annals of Proba- bility,25(1):115–132, 1997

    1997

  20. [28]

    Opinion dynamics and bounded confi- dence models, analysis, and simulation.Journal of artificial societies and social simulation,5(3), 2002

    Rainer Hegselmann, and Ulrich Krause. Opinion dynamics and bounded confi- dence models, analysis, and simulation.Journal of artificial societies and social simulation,5(3), 2002

    2002

  21. [29]

    Denton, Michael E

    Elisa Heinrich Mora, Kaleda K. Denton, Michael E. Palmer, and Marcus W. Feldman. Conformity to continuous and discrete ordered traits.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,122(03):e2417078122, 2025

    2025

  22. [30]

    Holley, and Thomas M

    Richard A. Holley, and Thomas M. Liggett. Ergodic theorems for weakly interacting infinite systems and the voter model.The Annals of Probability, 3(4):643–663, 1975

    1975

  23. [31]

    Hutchinson

    John E. Hutchinson. Fractals and self similarity.Indiana University Mathe- matics Journal,30(5):713–747, 1981. REFERENCES 29

    1981

  24. [32]

    Clustering and asymptotic be- havior in opinion formation.Journal of Differential Equations,257(11):4165– 4187, 2014

    Pierre-Emmanuel Jabin, and Sebastien Motsch. Clustering and asymptotic be- havior in opinion formation.Journal of Differential Equations,257(11):4165– 4187, 2014

    2014

  25. [33]

    Distribution functions and the Riemann zeta function.Transactions of the American Mathematical Society,38:48–88, 1935

    Børge Jessen, and Aurel Wintner. Distribution functions and the Riemann zeta function.Transactions of the American Mathematical Society,38:48–88, 1935

    1935

  26. [34]

    On symmetric Bernoulli convolutions

    Richard Kershner, and Aurel Wintner. On symmetric Bernoulli convolutions. American Journal of Mathematics,57(3):541–548, 1935

    1935

  27. [35]

    Thomas Milton Liggett, and Thomas M. Liggett. Interacting particle systems. New York: Springer, 1985

    1985

  28. [36]

    On steady distributions of kinetic models of conservative economies.Journal of Statistical Physics,130(6):1087– 1117, 2008

    Daniel Matthes, and Giuseppe Toscani. On steady distributions of kinetic models of conservative economies.Journal of Statistical Physics,130(6):1087– 1117, 2008

    2008

  29. [37]

    Mathematical mod- eling of collective behavior in socio-economic and life sciences.Springer Science & Business Media, 2010

    Giovanni Naldi, Lorenzo Pareschi, and Giuseppe Toscani. Mathematical mod- eling of collective behavior in socio-economic and life sciences.Springer Science & Business Media, 2010

    2010

  30. [38]

    MacLaren, Shelley D

    Sriniwas Pandey, Yiding Cao, Yingjun Dong, Minjun Kim, Neil G. MacLaren, Shelley D. Dionne, Francis J. Yammarino, and Hiroki Sayama Generation and influence of eccentric ideas on social networks.Scientific Reports,13(1):20433, 2023

    2023

  31. [39]

    Chakrabarti

    Parongama Sen, and Bikas K. Chakrabarti. Sociophysics: an introduction. OUP Oxford, 2014

    2014

  32. [40]

    On the random series ∑ ±λn (an Erdös problem).Annals of Mathematics,142(3):611–625, 1995

    Boris Solomyak. On the random series ∑ ±λn (an Erdös problem).Annals of Mathematics,142(3):611–625, 1995

    1995

  33. [41]

    Opinion evolution in closed com- munity.International Journal of Modern Physics C,11(06):1157–1165, 2000

    Katarzyna Sznajd-Weron, and Jozef Sznajd. Opinion evolution in closed com- munity.International Journal of Modern Physics C,11(06):1157–1165, 2000

    2000

  34. [42]

    Topics in propagation of chaos

    Alain-Sol Sznitman. Topics in propagation of chaos. InEcole d’été de proba- bilités de Saint-Flour XIX—1989, pages 165–251. Springer, 1991

    1989

  35. [43]

    Kinetic models of opinion formation.Communications in Mathematical Sciences,4(3):481–496, 2006

    Giuseppe Toscani. Kinetic models of opinion formation.Communications in Mathematical Sciences,4(3):481–496, 2006

    2006

  36. [44]

    Péter P. Varjú. Recent progress on Bernoulli convolutions.European Congress of Mathematics, pp. 847–867, 2016. REFERENCES 30

    2016

  37. [45]

    Péter P. Varjú. Absolute continuity of Bernoulli convolutions for algebraic parameters.Journal of the American Mathematical Society,32(2):351–397, 2019

    2019

  38. [46]

    Navigating political disagreement on social media: How affective responses and belonging influence unfollowing and unfriending.Media and Communication,12(0), 2024

    Bingbing Zhang, and Heather Shoenberger. Navigating political disagreement on social media: How affective responses and belonging influence unfollowing and unfriending.Media and Communication,12(0), 2024

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.