arbiter
JournalsAccount

On the Stationary Measures of Two Variants of the Voter Model

Jhon Astoquillca

Journal of Theoretical Probability2026https://doi.org/10.1007/s10959-025-01474-1article
ABDC A
Weight
0.50

Abstract

In the voter model, vertices of a graph (interpreted as voters) adopt one out of two opinions (0 and 1) and update their opinions at random times by copying the opinion of a neighbor chosen uniformly at random. This process is dual to a system of coalescing random walks. The duality implies that the set of stationary measures of the voter model on a graph is linked to the dynamics of the collision of random walks on this graph. By exploring the key ideas behind this relationship, we characterize the sets of stationary measures for two variations in the voter model: first, a version that incorporates interchanging of opinions among voters, and second, the voter model on dynamical percolation. To achieve these results, we analyze the collision properties of random walks in two contexts: first, with a swapping behavior that complicates collisions, and second, with random walks defined on a dynamical percolation environment.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10959-025-01474-1

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{jhon2026,
  title        = {{On the Stationary Measures of Two Variants of the Voter Model}},
  author       = {Jhon Astoquillca},
  journal      = {Journal of Theoretical Probability},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10959-025-01474-1},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

On the Stationary Measures of Two Variants of the Voter Model

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.