Figure 4
(a)–(c): Mean-field results obtained analytically for generalizations of the basic model with (a) stubborn moderates, (b) evangelical moderates, and (c) nonsocial deradicalization (see the text for details). The final equilibrium values of
(red plus signs),
(blue dots), and
(magenta open circles) for the initial condition
are plotted as a function of the new parameter (
,
, or
) in the corresponding generalized model. Of the three strategies shown—and in fact for all seven considered in the Supplemental Material [
23]—only nonsocial deradicalization allows for the growth of the moderate fraction up to
without risking its extinction. (d)–(f): Representative simulation results for the discrete-time versions of the models with (d) stubborn moderates, (e) evangelical moderates, and (f) nonsocial deradicalization when these models are run on the arXiv.org coauthorship network for high energy physics theory (hep-th) [
25]. The plots show the equilibrium fractions of
(red plus signs),
(blue dots), and
(magenta open circles) obtained. Each simulation is started from the state in which a random but highly interconnected fraction
of the population is committed to a belief in
and the rest believe
. The simulation is then run for
time steps after which the values of
,
, and
are tabulated. The constant fractions of zealots in the six panels of this figure are (a) 0.1, (b) 0.1, (c) 0.05, (d) 0.035, (e) 0.02, and (f) 0.02.
Reuse & Permissions