According to the structural balance theory, interacting systems balance the positive and negative relations between different system elements such that local conflicts are minimized. Hence, structural imbalances induce a dynamics to resolve such conflicts. This dynamics plays a vital role in evolutionary processes because many very different final states can be reached. When the resolution of one local conflict leads to the formation of another one, metastable states can emerge, and complete balance is out of reach. When complete balance is instead attained, either state with full consensus (paradise state) or two coexisting enemy groups (polarization) crystallize.
Given the big difference in the reachable final states, we should ask: Is structural balance good or bad for a system? Does it hamper the functionality or performance of a system? Or does it improve it? Do we have the right data to answer these questions?
Chair of Systems Design,
ETH Zürich
IFISC (UIB-CSIC)
Max Planck Institute for Mathematics in the Sciences in Leipzig
From data to signed networks. We miss large-scale longitudinal data about signed relations. In human social systems, these data are commonly collected using surveys, an expensive and hardly scalable procedure. Nowadays, new methods are developed to infer signed relations from data that are easier to collect and process, such as communication and online interaction data. Inference of signed networks lets the researchers to propose, test and verify models of signed relations.
Prof. Frank Schweitzer (Chair of Systems Design, ETH Zürich)
Inferring signed relations from unsigned interaction data
Dr. Corrado Monti (CENTAI)
Learning opinion dynamics from social traces
Prof. Gholamreza Jafari (Department of Physics & Institute for Cognitive Science and Brian, Shahid Beheshti University)
Statistical physics of Heider and coevolutionary balance
Evolution and models of signed relations. Dynamics following concepts of structural balance and other social theories plays a vital role in evolutionary processes because many very different final states can be reached. For instance, in terms of structural balance, the big question is whether complete balance (either the state with full consensus or two coexisting enemy groups) is attainable or if such a state is out of reach.
Prof. Maxi San Miguel, IFISC (UIB-CSIC)
Topological transitions in the coupled dynamics of signed relations and node states
Shazia Ayn Babul (Mathematical Institute, University of Oxford)
Generalizing SpringRank to signed graphs
According to structural balance theory, positive and negative relations evolve in such a way that local conflicts are minimized. However, the resolution of one local conflict may lead to the formation of another one. This leads to the following questions. Is structural balance good or bad for a system? Does it hamper the functionality or performance of a system? Or does it improve it? Current research obtained opposite findings and the link between structural balance and performance is still open.
Dr. Eckehard Olbrich (Max Planck Institute for Mathematics in the Sciences, Leipzig)
Inter-issue consistency networks and the reconfiguration of the German political space: Understanding the rise of populism
Dr. Paolo Bartesaghi (Department of Statistics and Quantitative Methods, University of Milano - Bicocca)
Local balance index reveals major historical events in global international relations
All speakers need to register at the main CCS conference. The registration will be available through the main conference webpage: www.ccs2022.org/.
The satellite is a hybrid event. The in-place venue is Auditorium of Palma de Mallorca Convention Center, see https://www.ccs2022.org/index.php/general-information/venue for details.
Chair of Systems Design,
ETH Zürich
Faculty of Physics,
Warsaw University of Technology