4.7 Article

Naming Game with Multiple Hearers

Journal

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.cnsns.2012.09.022

Keywords

Complex network; Average degree; Clustering coefficient; Naming game; Multiple hearers

Funding

  1. Hong Kong Research Grants Council under the GRF [CityU1114/11E]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A new model called Naming Game with Multiple Hearers (NGMH) is proposed in this paper. A naming game over a population of individuals aims to reach consensus on the name of an object through pair-wise local interactions among all the individuals. The proposed NGMH model describes the learning process of a new word, in a population with one speaker and multiple hearers, at each interaction towards convergence. The characteristics of NGMH are examined on three types of network topologies, namely ER random-graph network, WS small-world network, and BA scale-free network. Comparative analysis on the convergence time is performed, revealing that the topology with a larger average (node) degree can reach consensus faster than the others over the same population. It is found that, for a homogeneous network, the average degree is the limiting value of the number of hearers, which reduces the individual ability of learning new words, consequently decreasing the convergence time; for a scale-free network, this limiting value is the deviation of the average degree. It is also found that a network with a larger clustering coefficient takes longer time to converge; especially a small-word network with smallest rewiring possibility takes longest time to reach convergence. As more new nodes are being added to scale-free networks with different degree distributions, their convergence time appears to be robust against the network-size variation. Most new findings reported in this paper are different from that of the single-speaker/single-hearer naming games documented in the literature. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available