many models have been developed for behavioral changes , but only a few are formulated in terms of mathematical relations .
for example ,    * _ game theory _ ( von neumann and morgenstern , 1944 ) , based on the concept of success of meeting strategies ,
is used for the description of cooperation and competition processes among individuals , * _ decision theories _ ( domencich and mcfadden , 1975 , ortzar and willumsen , 1990 ) , assuming the maximization of utility , successfully model the choice behavior among several alternatives , * _ diffusion models _ ( coleman , 1964 , bartholomew , 1967 , granovetter , 1983 , kennedy , 1983 ) mathematically describe the spread of behaviors or opinions , rumors , innovations , etc .
all these models are related to a more general behavioral model discussed in the following .
this model is based on boltzmann-_like equations _ and includes _ spontaneous _ ( or _ externally induced _ ) behavioral changes and behavioral changes by _ pair interactions _ of individuals ( sect . [ s2 ] ) .
these changes are described by _
transition rates_. they reflect the results of mental and psychical processes , which could be simulated with the help of osgood and tannenbaum s ( 1955 ) _ congruity principle _ , heider s ( 1946 ) _ balance theory _ or festinger s ( 1957 ) _ dissonance theory_. however , it is sufficient for our model to determine the transition rates empirically ( sect .
the _ ansatz _ used for the transition rates distinguishes _ imitative _ and _ avoidance processes _ , and assumes _ utility maximization _ by a variant of the _ multinomial logit model _
( domencich and mcfadden , 1975 , ortzar and willumsen , 1990 ) ( sect .
[ s2.1 ] ) .    in section [ s3 ] a consequent mathematical formulation related to an idea of lewin ( 1951 ) is developed , according to which the behavior of individuals is guided by a _
social field_. this formulation is achieved by a second order taylor _ approximation _ of the boltzmann - like equations leading to _
diffusion equations_. because of their relation with the boltzmann equation ( boltzmann , 1964 ) and the fokker - planck equation ( fokker , 1914 , planck , 1917 ) they will be called the boltzmann - fokker - planck _ equations_. according to these new equations the most probable behavioral change is given by a vectorial quantity that can be interpreted as _ social force _ ( sect . [ s3.1 ] ) . the social force results from external influences ( the environment ) as well as from individual interactions . in special cases
the social force is the derivative ( gradient ) of a potential .
this potential reflects public opinion , social norms and trends , and will be called the _ social field_. by _ diffusion coefficients _ individual variation of the behavior ( the `` freedom of will '' ) is taken into account . in section [ s4 ] representative cases
are illustrated by computer simulations .
the boltzmann - fokker - planck model for the behavior of individuals under the influence of a social field shows some analogies with the physical model for the behavior of electrons in an electric field ( e.g. of an atomic nucleus ) ( helbing , 1992a , c ) .
in particular , individuals and electrons influence the concrete form of the _ effective _ social , respectively , electric field .
however , the behavior of electrons is governed by a _ different _ equation : the schrdinger _ equation _
( schrdinger , 1926 , davydov , 1976 ) .
let us consider a population consisting of a great number @xmath0 of individuals .
concerning a special topic of interest , these individuals show a behavior @xmath1 out of several possible behaviors in the set @xmath2 .    due to `` freedom of the will '' one can not expect a deterministic theory for the temporal change @xmath3 of the individual behavior @xmath4 to be realistic .
however , one can construct a model for the change of the _ probability distribution _
@xmath5 of behaviors @xmath4 within the given population ( @xmath6 , @xmath7 ) .
a theory of this kind is , of course , stochastic . in order to take into account several _ types _ @xmath8 of behavior
, we may distinguish @xmath9 _ subpopulations _
@xmath8 consisting of @xmath10 individuals ( @xmath11 ) . then , the following relation holds : @xmath12 our goal is now to find a suitable equation for the probability distribution @xmath13 of behaviors within subpopulation @xmath8 ( @xmath14 , @xmath15 ) . if we neglect memory effects ( cf . sect .
[ s6.1 ] ) , the desired equation is of the form @xmath16 whereas the _ inflow _ into @xmath1 is given as the sum over all absolute transition rates describing changes from an _ arbitrary _ behavior @xmath17 to @xmath1 , the _ outflow _ from @xmath1 is given as the sum over all absolute transition rates describing changes from @xmath1 to _ another _ behavior @xmath17 . since the absolute transition rate of changes from @xmath1 to @xmath17 is the product @xmath18 of the _ relative transition rate _
@xmath19 for a change to behavior @xmath17 _ given _
@xmath1 , and the probability @xmath13 of behavior @xmath1 , we arrive at the explicit equation @xmath20 \ , .
\label{boltz}\ ] ] @xmath19 has the meaning of a transition probablility from @xmath1 to @xmath17 per unit time and takes into account the behavioral variations between the individuals ( occurring even within the same type @xmath8 of behavior ! ) .    in the following we have to specify the relative transition rates @xmath19 , which will turn out to be _ effective _ transition rates .
if we restrict the model to spontaneous ( or externally induced ) behavioral changes and behavioral changes due to pair interactions , we have ( helbing , 1992a , c ) : @xmath21 @xmath22 describes the rate of spontaneous ( resp . externally induced ) transitions from @xmath1 to @xmath17 for individuals of subpopulation @xmath8 .
@xmath23 is the transition rate for two individuals of types @xmath8 and @xmath24 to change their behaviors from @xmath1 and @xmath25 to @xmath17 and @xmath26 , respectively , due to pair interactions .
the total frequency of these interactions is proportional to the probability @xmath27 of behavior @xmath25 within subpopulation @xmath24 and the number @xmath28 of individuals of type @xmath24 .
we have to sum up over @xmath24 , @xmath25 , and @xmath26 since all specifications of these variables are effectively connected with transitions from @xmath1 to @xmath17 of individuals of subpopulation  @xmath8 .    inserting ( [ effrate ] ) into ( [ boltz ] )
, we now obtain the socalled boltzmann-_like equations _
( helbing , 1992a , c )    [ boltzlike ]    @xmath29 \\   & + & \sum_{b=1}^a \sum_{{x}'\in \omega } \sum_{{y}\in \omega }    \sum_{{y}'\in \omega }    w_{ab}({\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}},{\mbox{\boldmath $ y$}}'|{\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}}',{\mbox{\boldmath $ y$}};t ) p_b({\mbox{\boldmath $ y$}},t)p_a({\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}}',t )   \nonumber \\   & - & \sum_{b=1}^a \sum_{{x}'\in \omega } \sum_{{y}\in \omega }    \sum_{{y}'\in \omega }    w_{ab}({\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}}',{\mbox{\boldmath $ y$}}'|{\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}},{\mbox{\boldmath $ y$}};t ) p_b({\mbox{\boldmath $ y$}},t)p_a({\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}},t)\end{aligned}\ ] ]    with @xmath30 obviously , ( [ boltzlike]b ) depends nonlinearly ( quadratically ) on the probability distributions @xmath13 ( resp .
@xmath27 ) which is due to the pair interactions .
the boltzmann - like equations originally had been developed for the description of the kinetics of gases ( boltzmann , 1964 ) .
however , they have also been applied to attitude formation ( helbing , 1992b , c ) and the avoidance behavior of pedestrians ( helbing , 1992c , d ) .
it is possible to generalize the model to simultaneous interactions of an arbitrary number of individuals ( i.e. , higher order interactions ) ( helbing , 1992a , c ) .
however , in most cases behavioral changes are dominated by pair interactions ( _ dyadic _ interactions ) . many of the phenomena occurring in social interaction processes can already be understood in terms of pair interactions .      for models of behavioral changes
the following special form of the effective transition rates ( [ effrate ] ) has been found to be suitable ( helbing , 1992b , c , e ) : @xmath31    r^a({\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}}'|{\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}};t ) \ , .
\label{concrates}\ ] ] here ,    * @xmath32 is a measure of the rate of spontaneous ( or externally induced ) behavioral changes within subpopulation @xmath8 . *
@xmath33 [ resp .
@xmath34 is the _ readiness _ of an individual of subpopulation @xmath8 to change behavior from @xmath1 to @xmath17 spontaneously [ resp . in pair interactions ] .
* @xmath35 is the _ interaction rate _ of an individual of subpopulation @xmath8 with individuals of subpopulation @xmath24 .
* @xmath36 is a measure for the frequency of _ imitative processes _
@xmath37 where an individual of subpopulation @xmath8 takes over the behavior @xmath17 of an individual of subpopulation @xmath24 .
the total frequency of imitative processes is proportional to the probablility @xmath38 of behavior @xmath17 within subpopulation @xmath24 .
* @xmath39 is a measure for the frequency of _ avoidance processes _
@xmath40 where an individual of subpopulation @xmath8 changes the behavior @xmath1 to another behavior @xmath17 if meeting an individual of subpopulation @xmath24 with the same behavior ( defiant behavior , snob effect ) .
the total frequency of avoidance processes is proportional to the probablility @xmath41 of behavior @xmath1 within subpopulation @xmath24 .    a more detailled discussion of the different kinds of interaction processes and of _ ansatz _ ( [ concrates ] ) is given in publications of helbing ( 1992b , c , e ) .    for @xmath42
we take the quite general form    [ util ]    @xmath43    with @xmath44 ( cf . weidlich and haag , 1988 , helbing , 1992c ) .
then , the readiness @xmath42 for an individual of subpopulation @xmath8 to change behavior from @xmath1 to @xmath17 will be greater ,    * the greater the _ difference _ in the _ utilities _ @xmath45 of behaviors @xmath17 and @xmath1 , * the smaller the _ incompatibility ( `` distance '' ) _
@xmath46 between the behaviors @xmath1 and @xmath17 .
similar to ( [ util ] ) we use @xmath47    and , therefore , allow the utility function @xmath48 for spontaneous ( or externally induced ) behavioral changes to differ from the utility function @xmath49 for behavioral changes in pair interactions .
_ ansatz _ ( [ util ] ) is related to the _ multinomial logit model _ ( domencich and mcfadden , 1975 , ortzar and willumsen , 1990 ) .
it assumes _ utility maximization _ with incomplete information about the exact utility of a behavioral change from @xmath1 to @xmath17 , which is , therefore , estimated and stochastically varying ( cf .
helbing , 1992c ) .
computer simulations of the boltzmann - like equations ( [ boltz ] ) , ( [ concrates ] ) , ( [ util ] ) are discussed and illustrated in helbing ( 1992b , c , e ) ( cf . also sect .
[ s4 ] ) .
the boltzmann - like equations ( [ boltz ] ) , ( [ concrates ] ) include a variety of special cases , which have become very important in the social sciences :    * the _ logistic equation _ ( pearl , 1924 , verhulst , 1845 ) describes limited growth processes .
let us consider the situation of two behaviors @xmath50 ( i.e. , @xmath51 ) and one subpopulation ( @xmath52 ) .
@xmath53 may , for example , have the meaning to apply a certain strategy , and @xmath54 not to do so . if only imitative processes @xmath55 and processes of spontaneous replacement @xmath56 are considered , one arrives at the _ logistic equation _ @xmath57 * the _ gravity model _ ( zipf , 1946 , ravenstein , 1876 ) describes processes of exchange between different places @xmath1 . its dynamical version results for @xmath58 , @xmath59 , @xmath60 , and @xmath52 : @xmath61 p({\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}},t)p({\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}}',t ) \ , .\ ] ] here , we have dropped the index @xmath8 because of @xmath62 .
@xmath5 is the probability of being at place @xmath1 .
the absolute rate of exchange from @xmath1 to @xmath17 is proportional to the probabilities @xmath5 and @xmath63 at the places @xmath1 and @xmath17 .
@xmath64 is often chosen as a function of the metric distance @xmath65 between @xmath1 and @xmath17 : @xmath66 . *
the _ behavioral model _ of weidlich and haag ( 1983 , 1988 , weidlich , 1991 , 1994 ) is based on spontaneous transitions .
we obtain this model for @xmath67 and @xmath68 because of the dependence of the utilities @xmath48 on the behavioral distributions @xmath41 the model assumes _ indirect interactions _ , which are , for example , mediated by the newspapers , tv or radio .
@xmath69 is the _ preference _ of subpopulation @xmath8 for behavior @xmath1 .
@xmath70 are _ coupling parameters _ describing the influence of the behaviorial distribution within subpopulation  @xmath24 on the behavior of subpoplation @xmath8 . for @xmath71 , @xmath70
reflects the _ social pressure _ of behavioral majorities .
* the _ game dynamical equations _ ( hofbauer and sigmund , 1988 , schuster _ et .
al . _ , 1981 ,
helbing , 1992c , e , 1993 ) result for @xmath72 , @xmath60 , and @xmath73 where @xmath74 for a detailled interpretation of these relations see helbing ( 1992c , e ) .
+ the explicit form of the game dynamical equations is + [ game ] + @xmath75 \\   & + & \nu_{aa}(t ) p_a({\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}},t ) \big [ e_a({\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}},t ) - \langle e_a \rangle   \big ] \ , .\end{aligned}\ ] ] + whereas ( [ game]a ) again describes spontaneous behavioral changes ( _ `` mutations '' _ , innovations ) , ( [ game]b ) reflects competition processes leading to a _
`` selection '' _ of behaviors with a _ success _ @xmath76 that exceeds the _ average success _ @xmath77 the success
@xmath76 is connected with the socalled _ payoff matrices _
@xmath78 by @xmath79 ( helbing , 1992c , e ) .
@xmath80 means the success of behavior @xmath1 with respect to the environment .
+ since the game dynamical equations ( [ game ] ) agree with the _ selection mutation equations _
( hofbauer and sigmund , 1988 ) they are not only a powerful tool in social sciences and economy ( axelrod , 1984 , von neumann and morgenstern , 1944 , schuster _ et .
al . _ , 1981 ,
helbing , 1992c , e , 1993 ) , but also in evolutionary biology ( fisher , 1930 , eigen , 1971 , eigen and schuster , 1979 , feistel and ebeling , 1989 ) .
we shall now assume the set @xmath2 of possible behaviors forms a _ continuous _ space .
the @xmath81 dimensions of this space correspond to different characteristic _ aspects _ of the considered behaviors . in the continuous formulation ,
the sums in ( [ boltz ] ) , ( [ effrate ] ) have to be replaced by integrals :    [ cont ]    @xmath82 \ , , \ ] ]    @xmath83    a reformulation of the boltzmann - like equations ( [ cont ] ) via a second order taylor _ approximation _ ( kramers - moyal expansion ( kramers , 1940 , moyal , 1949 ) ) leads to _ diffusion equations _ ( helbing , 1992a , c ) :    [ bfp ]    @xmath84 + \frac{1}{2 } \sum_{i , j=1}^n   \frac{\partial}{\partial x_{i}}\frac{\partial } { \partial x_{j } } \big[q_{a
i j}({\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}},t ) p_a({\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}},t)\big ]    \label{bfp}\ ] ]    with the effective _ drift coefficients _ @xmath85 and the effective _ diffusion coefficients _ contains additional terms due to another derivation of ( [ bfp ] )
. however , they make no contributions , since they result in vanishing surface integrals ( helbing , 1992c ) . ]
@xmath86    because of their relation with the boltzmann equation ( boltzmann , 1964 ) and the fokker - planck equation ( fokker , 1914 , planck , 1917 ) equations ( [ bfp ] ) will be called the boltzmann - fokker - planck _ equations _ in the following ( cf . helbing 1992a ,
c ) . in the boltzmann - fokker - planck equations the drift coefficients
@xmath87 govern the systematic change ( `` drift '' , motion ) of the distribution @xmath13 , whereas the diffusion coefficients @xmath88 describe the spread of the distribution @xmath13 due to fluctuations resulting from the individual variation of behavioral changes .    for _ ansatz _
( [ concrates ] ) , the effective drift and diffusion coefficients can be split into contributions due to spontaneous ( or externally induced ) transitions ( @xmath89 ) , imitative processes ( @xmath90 ) , and avoidance processes ( @xmath91 ) :    [ sum ]    @xmath92    where @xmath93 and @xmath94    the behavioral changes induced by the _ environment _ are included in @xmath95 and @xmath96 .
the boltzmann - fokker - planck equations ( [ bfp ] ) are equivalent to the stochastic equations ( langevin equations , 1908 )    [ langevin ]    @xmath97    with @xmath98   g_{ajk}({\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}},t )    \label{drift}\ ] ] and @xmath99    ( cf .
stratonovich , 1963 , helbing , 1992c ) . for an individual of subpopulation
@xmath8 the vector @xmath100 with the components @xmath101 describes the contribution to the change of behavior @xmath1 that is caused by behavioral fluctuations @xmath102 ( which are assumed to be delta - correlated and gaussian ( helbing , 1992c ) ) . since the diffusion coefficients @xmath88 and the coefficients @xmath103 are usually small quantities , we have @xmath104 ( cf .
( [ drift ] ) ) , and ( [ langevin ] ) can be put into the form @xmath105 whereas the fluctuation term describes individual behavioral variations , the vectorial quantity @xmath106 drives the systematic change of the behavior @xmath4 of individuals of subpopulation @xmath8 .
therefore , it is justified to denote @xmath107 as _ social force _ acting on individuals of subpopulation @xmath8 . with
that we have attained a very intuitive formulation of social processes , according to which behavioral changes are caused by social forces .
on the one hand , social forces influence the behavior of the individuals , but on the other hand , due to interactions , the behavior of the individuals also influences the social forces via the behavioral distributions @xmath13 ( cf .
( [ cont]b ) , ( [ effdr ] ) ) .
that means , @xmath108 is a function of the social processes within the given population .    under the integrability conditions
@xmath109 there exists a time - dependent _ potential _
@xmath110 so that the social force is given by its derivative ( by its gradient @xmath111 ) : @xmath112 the potential @xmath113 can be understood as _
social field_. it reflects the social influences and interactions relevant for behavioral changes : the public opinion , trends , social norms , etc .
clearly , the social force is not a force obeying the newtonian ( 1687 ) laws of mechanics ( cf .
greenwood , 1988 ) . instead , the social force @xmath107 is a vectorial quantity with the following properties :    * @xmath107 drives the temporal change @xmath3 of another vectorial quantity : the behavior @xmath4 of an individual of subpopulation @xmath8 .
* the component @xmath114 r^a({\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}}'|{\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}};t)\ ] ] of the social force @xmath107 describes the reaction of subpopulation @xmath8 on the behavioral distribution within subpopulation @xmath24 and usually differs from @xmath115 , which describes the influence of subpopulation @xmath8 on subpopulation @xmath24 . * neglecting fluctuations , the behavior @xmath4 does not change if @xmath107 vanishes .
@xmath116 corresponds to an _ extremum _ of the social field @xmath113 , because it means @xmath117    we will now compare our results with lewin s ( 1951 ) _ social field theory_. from social psychology it is well - known that the behavior of an individual is determined by the totality of _ environmental influences _ and his or her _ personality_. inspired by electro - magnetic field theory , social field theory claims that environmental influences can be considered as a _ dynamical force field _
, which should be mathematically representable .
a temporal change of this field will evoke a _
psychical tension _ which , then , induces a _
( behavioral ) compensation_.    in the following it will turn out that our model allows a fully mathematical specification of the field theoretical ideas , which was still to be found :    * let us assume that an individual s objective is to behave in an optimal way with respect to the social field @xmath113 , that means , he or she tends to a behavior corresponding to a _
minimum _ of the social field .
* if the behavior @xmath1 does not agree with a minimum of the social field @xmath113 this evokes a force @xmath118 that is given by the gradient of the social field @xmath113 ( pulling into the direction of steepest descent of @xmath113 ) .
the force @xmath107 plays the role of the _ psychical tension_. it induces a behavioral change according to @xmath119 * the behavioral change @xmath3 drives the behavior @xmath4 towards a minimum @xmath120 of the social field @xmath113 .
when the minimum @xmath120 is reached , then @xmath121 holds and , therefore , @xmath116 . as a consequence , the psychical tension vanishes , that means
, it is _ compensated _ by the previous behavioral changes .
+ when the psychical tension @xmath107 vanishes then , except for fluctuations , no behavioral changes take place  in accordance with ( [ accor ] ) .
the individual has reached an _ equilibrium _ within the social field , then . * note , that the social fields @xmath113 of different subpopulations @xmath8 usually have different minima @xmath120 .
this means that individuals of different types @xmath8 of behavior will normally feel different psychical tensions @xmath107 . in other words ,
index @xmath8 distinguishes different _
the boltzmann - fokker - planck equations are able to describe a broad spectrum of social phenomena . in the following ,
some of the results shall be illustrated by computer simulations .
we shall examine the case of @xmath122 subpopulations , and a situation for which the interesting aspect of the individual behavior can be described by a certain _ position _
@xmath123 on a one - dimensional continuous scale ( i.e. , @xmath124 , @xmath125 ) .
a concrete example for this situation would be the case of _ opinion formation_. here , conservative and progressive thinking individuals could be distinguished by different subpopulations . the position @xmath123 would describe the grade of approval or disapproval with respect to a certain political option ( for example , sdi , power stations , golf war , etc . ) .    in the one - dimensional case ,
the integrability conditions ( [ intcond ] ) are automatically fulfilled , and the social field @xmath126 is well - defined .
the parameter @xmath127 can be chosen arbitrarily .
we will take for @xmath127 the value that shifts the absolute minimum of @xmath128 to zero , that means , @xmath129    * since we will restrict the simulations to the case of imitative or avoidance processes , the shape of the social field @xmath128 changes with time only due to changes of the probability distributions @xmath130 ( cf .
( [ sum ] ) ) , that means , due to behavioral changes of the individuals ( see figures [ fi1 ] to [ fi6 ] ) .    in the one - dimensional case
one can find the formal _ stationary solution _
@xmath131 which we expect to be approached in the limit of large times @xmath132 . due to the dependence of @xmath133 and @xmath134 on @xmath135 , equations ( [ abh ] ) are only _ implicit _ equations
. however , from ( [ abh ] ) we can derive the following conclusions :    * if the diffusion coefficients are constant ( @xmath136 ) , ( [ abh ] ) simplifies to @xmath137   \right ) \
, , \ ] ] that means , the stationary solution @xmath135 is completely determined by the social field @xmath138 .
especially , @xmath135 has its maxima at the positions @xmath139 , where the social field @xmath138 has its minima ( see fig . [ fi1 ] ) .
the diffusion constant @xmath140 regulates the width of the behavioral distribution @xmath135 . for @xmath141
there were no individual behavioral variations , and the behavioral distribution @xmath135 were sharply peaked at the deepest minimum @xmath139 of @xmath138 .
* if the diffusion coefficients @xmath134 are varying functions of the position @xmath123 , the behavioral distribution @xmath135 is also influenced by the concrete form of @xmath134 . from ( [ abh ] )
one expects high behavioral probabilities @xmath135 where the diffusion coefficients @xmath134 are small ( see fig .
[ fi2 ] , where the probability distribution @xmath142 can not be explained solely by the social field @xmath143 ) . *
since the stationary solution @xmath135 depends on both , @xmath133 and @xmath134 , different combinations of @xmath133 and @xmath134 can lead to the same probability distribution @xmath135 ( see fig .
[ fi4 ] in the limit of large times ) .    for the following simulations
, we shall assume @xmath144 $ ] and use the _ ansatz _    [ ans ]    @xmath145    for the readiness @xmath146 to change from @xmath123 to @xmath147 ( cf .
( [ util ] ) ) . with the utility function @xmath148
subpopulation @xmath8 prefers behavior @xmath149 .
@xmath150 means the _ indifference _ of subpopulation @xmath8 with respect to variations of the position @xmath123 .
moreover , we take @xmath151    where @xmath152 can be interpreted as measure for the _ range of interaction_. according to ( [ dist ] ) , the rate of behavioral changes is the smaller the greater they are
. only small changes of the position ( i.e. , between neighboring positions ) contribute with an appreciable rate .
figure [ fi1 ] to [ fi6 ] show the respective values of @xmath152 , @xmath153 , and @xmath154 used in the simulations .
note , that @xmath152 and the readiness @xmath155 are different quantities .
for very small values of the range @xmath152 of interaction the diffusion coefficients @xmath134 can be neglected and the fluctuations play a neglible role , that means , behavioral changes are mainly given by the social field ( see fig .
1 ) . for greater but still small values of @xmath152 ,
the diffusion coefficients have to be taken into account in order to fully understand the temporal development of the behavioral distribution @xmath130 ( see fig .
if @xmath152 exceeds a certain value , the taylor approximation is invalid , and the boltzmann - like equations should be applied instead of the boltzmann - fokker - planck equations .
let @xmath156 be the degree of _ sympathy _ which individuals of subpopulation @xmath8 feel towards individuals of subpopulation @xmath24 .
then , one expects the following : whereas the frequency @xmath36 of imitative processes will be increasing with @xmath156 , the frequency @xmath39 of avoidance processes will be decreasing with @xmath156 .
this functional relationship can , for example , be described by @xmath157 with @xmath158 @xmath159 is a measure for the frequency of imitative processes within subpopulation @xmath8 , @xmath160 a measure for the frequency of avoidance processes .
if we assume the sympathy between individuals of the same subpopulation to be be maximal , we have @xmath161 .      in the following simulations of imitative processes we assume the preferred positions to be @xmath164 and @xmath165 .
with @xmath166 the individuals of subpopulation @xmath62 like the individuals of subpopulation @xmath167 , but not the other way round .
that means , subpopulation 2 influences subpopulation 1 , but not vice versa .
as expected , in both behavioral distributions @xmath130 there appears a maximum around the preferred behavior @xmath149 .
in addition , due to imitative processes of subpopulation 1 , a second maximum of @xmath168 develops around the preferred behavior @xmath169 of subpopulation  2 .
this second maximum is small , if the indifference @xmath153 of subpopulation 1 with respect to variations of the position @xmath123 is low ( see fig . [ fi1 ] ) .
for high values of the indifference @xmath153 even the _ majority _ of individuals of subpopulation 1 imitates the behavior of subpopulation 2 ( see fig .
[ fi2 ] ) !
one could say , the individuals of subpopulation 2 act as _
trendsetters_. this phenomenon is typical for _
we shall now consider the case @xmath170 for which the subpopulations influence each other mutually with equal strengths .
if the indifference @xmath150 with respect to changes of the position @xmath123 is small in both subpopulations  @xmath8 , _ each _ probability distribution @xmath130 has _ two _ maxima .
the higher maximum is located around the preferred position @xmath149 .
a second maximum can be found around the position preferred in the _ other _ subpopulation .
it is the higher , the greater the indifference @xmath150 is ( see fig .
[ fi3 ] ) .
however , if @xmath150 exceeds a certain value in at least one subpopulation , a socalled _ phase transition _ ( that means , a qualitative different situation ) occurs , since only _
one _ maximum develops in each behavioral distribution @xmath130 ! despite the fact that the social fields @xmath128 and diffusion coefficients @xmath171 of the subpopulations @xmath8 are different because of their different preferred positions @xmath149 ( and different utility functions @xmath172 ) , the behavioral distributions @xmath130 agree after some time ! especially , the maxima @xmath139 of the distributions @xmath130 are located at the _ same _ position @xmath173 in both subpopulations .
one could say , the two subpopulations made a _
compromise_. the compromise @xmath173 is nearer to the position @xmath149 of the subpopulation @xmath8 with the lower indifference @xmath150 ( see fig .  [ fi4 ] ) .      for the simulation of avoidance processes we assume with @xmath176 and @xmath177 that both subpopulations nearly prefer the same behavior .
figure [ fi5 ] shows the case , where the individuals of different subpopulations dislike each other : @xmath178 this corresponds to a mutual influence of each subpopulation on the other .
the computational results indicate that    * individuals avoid behaviors which are found in the other subpopulation .
* the subpopulation @xmath62 with the lower indifference @xmath179 is distributed around the preferred behavior @xmath180 and pushes away the other subpopulation !    despite the fact that the initial behavioral distribution @xmath181 agrees in both subpopulations , there is nearly no overlapping of @xmath168 and @xmath182 after some time .
this is typical of _ polarization phenomena _ in the society .
well - known examples are the development of _ ghettos _ or the formation of _ extremist groups_.    in figure [ fi6 ] , we assume that the individuals of subpopulation 2 like the individuals of subpopulation 1 and , therefore , do not react to the behaviors in subpopulation 1 with avoidance processes : @xmath183 as a consequence , @xmath182 remains unchanged with time , whereas @xmath168 drifts away from the preferred behavior @xmath180 due to avoidance processes . surprisingly , the polarization effect is much smaller than in figure [ fi5 ] !
the distributions @xmath168 and @xmath182 overlap considerably .
this is , because the slope of @xmath182 is smaller than in figure [ fi5 ] ( and remains constant ) . as a consequence
, the probability for an individual of subpopulation  1 to meet a disliked individual of subpopulation 2 with the same behavior @xmath123 can hardly be decreased by a small behavioral change .
one may conclude , that polarization effects ( which often lead to an escalation ) can be reduced , if individuals do not return dislike with dislike .
for practical purposes one has , of course , to determine the model parameters from empirical data
. therefore , let us assume we know empirically the distribution functions @xmath184 , [ the interaction rates @xmath185 , ] and the effective transition rates @xmath186 ( @xmath187 ) for a couple of times @xmath188 .
the corresponding effective social fields @xmath189 and diffusion coefficients @xmath190 are , then , easily obtained as    [ empi ]    @xmath191    with @xmath192    and @xmath193 much more difficult is the determination of the utility functions @xmath194 , @xmath195 , the distance functions @xmath196 , and the rates @xmath197 , @xmath198 , @xmath199 .
this can be done by numerical minimization of the _ error function _
@xmath200 p_a^{\rm e}({\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}},t_l ) \right\}^2 \ , ,   \label{error}\ ] ] for example with the method of _ steepest descent _ ( cf .
al . _ , 1977 ) . in ( [ error ] )
, we have introduced the abbreviation @xmath201
\mbox{e}^{u^a({x}',t_l ) - u^a({x},t_l ) } \ , . \label{assum}\ ] ] it turns out ( cf .
helbing , 1992c ) , that the rates @xmath202 have to be taken constant during the minimization process ( e.g. , @xmath203 ) , whereas the parameters @xmath204 , @xmath205 , @xmath206 and @xmath207 are to be varied . for @xmath208 one inserts    [ dista ]    @xmath209    with @xmath210 ^ 2 \ !
+ w_{\rm e}^a({\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}}|{\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}}';t_l ) g_a({\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}},{\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}}';t_l ) \big [ p_a^{\rm e}({\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}}',t_l ) \big]^2\ ] ] and @xmath211 ^ 2 \
! + \big [ g_a({\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}},{\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}}';t_l ) p_a^{\rm e}({\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}}',t_l ) \big]^2 \ , .\ ] ]    ( [ dista ] ) follows from the minimum condition for @xmath212 ( cf .
helbing , 1992c ) .
since @xmath213 may have a couple of minima due to its nonlinearity , suitable start parameters have to be taken .
especially , the numerically determined rates @xmath214 and @xmath215 have to be non - negative .
if @xmath213 is minimal for the parameters @xmath204 , @xmath205 , @xmath212 , @xmath202 , @xmath214 and @xmath215 , this is ( as can easily be checked ) also true for the scaled parameters @xmath216 in order to obtain unique results we put @xmath217 and @xmath218 which leads to @xmath219 and @xmath220 @xmath221 and @xmath222 are _ mean utilities _ , whereas @xmath223 is a kind of _ unit of distance_.    the distances @xmath224 are suitable quantities for _ multidimensional scaling _ ( kruskal and wish , 1978 , young and hamer , 1987 ) .
they reflect the `` psychical structure '' ( psychical topology ) of individuals of subpopulation @xmath8 , since they determine which behaviors are more or less related ( compatible ) ( comp . to osgood _ et .
al . _ , 1957 ) . by the dependence on @xmath8
, @xmath224 distinguishes different psychical structures resulting in different types @xmath8 of behavior and , therefore , different `` characters '' ( personalities ) .      it is not easy to find suitable data for the determination of the model parameters , since usually there only exist data for the temporal development of a certain behavioral distribution @xmath225 , but not for the corresponding effective transition rates @xmath226 .
however , for a few countries all necessary data are known about _ migration _ between different regions ( see weidlich and haag , 1988 ) . in this case
, the behavior @xmath125 means _ to live in region _
@xmath227 , where @xmath228 is the number of distinguished regions .    in the following
, the results for migration in west germany shall be presented .
west germany is divided into 10 federal states and the region of west berlin ( see figure [ fi7 ] and table [ ta1 ] ) . the data for these @xmath229 regions can be found in the _ statistische jahrbcher _ of the years 1960 to 1985 on an annual basis ( @xmath230 , @xmath231 , @xmath232 , @xmath233 ) .
our data analysis will assume  with respect to migration
one more or less homogeneous population , that means , we have @xmath52 , and the index @xmath8 can be dropped .
figure [ fi8 ] shows some examples for the temporal variation of the effective transition rates @xmath234 .    using the method of steepest descent
, the minimization of the error function ( [ error ] ) , ( [ assum ] ) gives the following results : @xmath235 that means , avoidance processes are negligible .
the rate @xmath236 of spontaneous behavioral changes and the rate @xmath237 of imitative processes are depicted in figure [ fi9 ] .
the utility functions @xmath238 for spontaneous changes and the utility functions @xmath239 for imitative processes are illustrated in figures [ fi10 ] and [ fi11 ] .
the irregulatity of the utility functions @xmath239 indicates that they probably fit random fluctuations of the migration data .
indeed , a mathematical analysis proves that the term @xmath240 only explains 5.2 percent of the variance of the effective transition rates @xmath241 .
therefore , it makes _ no significant contribution _ to their mathematical description , and the migration rates @xmath241 of west germany can already be represented by the model @xmath242 this result agrees with the model of weidlich and haag ( 1988 ) !
figure [ fi12 ] shows the corresponding rate @xmath236 of spontaneous changes , and figure [ fi13 ] depicts the utility functions @xmath238 .
the distances @xmath243 can be calculated from the formulas ( [ dista ] ) , ( [ scal ] ) , and ( [ undi ] ) .
they are not only a measure for the mean _ geographical distances _ , but also for _ transaction costs _
( e.g. , removal costs ) and _ psychical differences _ ( of the language , mentality , etc . ) .
the replacement of the time dependent distances @xmath243 with the time independent values @xmath244 defined by @xmath245 ( see table [ ta2 ] ) allows for a further _ model reduction_. the optimal value of the rate of spontaneous behavioral changes is , then , given by @xmath246 although the reduced model @xmath247 only needs @xmath248 variables for the description of @xmath249 effective transition rates @xmath250 , it attains a very good correlation of 0.984 with the empirical data . for a more detailled discussion of this model , see weidlich and haag ( 1988 ) .
in this article , a behavioral model has been proposed that incorporates in a consistent way many models of social theory : the diffusion models , the multinomial logit model , lewin s field theory , the logistic equation , the gravity model , the weidlich - haag model , and the game dynamical equations .
this very general model opens new perspectives concerning a theoretical description and understanding of behavioral changes , since it is formulated fully mathematically .
it takes into account spontaneous ( or externally induced ) behavioral changes and behavioral changes due to pair interactions
. two important kinds of pair interactions have been distinguished : imitative processes and avoidance processes .
the model turns out to be suitable for computational simulations , but it can also be applied to concrete empirical data .      the formulation of the model in the previous sections has neglected _ memory effects _ that may also influence behavioral changes . however , memory effects can be easily included by generalizing the boltzmann - like equations to              @xmath253 \\ & & \qquad \quad \displaystyle +   \frac{1}{2 } \sum_{i , j=1}^n   \frac{\partial}{\partial x_{i}}\frac{\partial } { \partial x_{j } } \big[q_{a i j}^{t - t'}({\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}},t ' ) p_a({\mbox{\boldmath $ x$}},t')\big ] \bigg\ } \end{array }   \label{membfp}\ ] ]      obviously , in these formulas there only appears an additional integration over past times @xmath257 ( helbing , 1992c ) .
the influence of the past results in a dependence of @xmath258 , @xmath259 , and @xmath260 on @xmath261 .
the boltzmann - like equations ( [ boltzlike ] ) resp .
the boltzmann - fokker - planck equations ( [ bfp ] ) used in the previous sections result from ( [ memb ] ) resp . ( [ membfp ] ) in the limit of short memory .
the force model described in section [ s3 ] can serve as a new mathematical modelling concept .
for example , it has successfully been applied to the simulation of _ pedestrian behavior _ ( cf .
helbing , 1991 ) .
another interesting field is an application of the force model to _ group dynamics _ and _ group formation_. in this case we take @xmath262 , that means , each subpopulation consists of one individual only ( @xmath263 ) .
since @xmath10 is violated , then , the temporal change @xmath264 of @xmath13 , which describes the probability of individual @xmath8 to show the behavior @xmath1 at time @xmath265 , is additionally subject to fluctuations ( cf .
helbing , 1992a , c ) .
the interaction rates @xmath266 are related to the _ adjacency matrix _ and describe the _ social ( interpersonal ) network _
( burt , 1982 ) .
moreover , the sympathy matrix @xmath267 is affected by the social processes .
the crucial task for simulating group dynamics is , therefore , to set up equations for the temporal change of @xmath156 .
the topic of group dynamics will be treated in a forthcoming paper .       + this work has been financially supported by the _
volkswagen stiftung _ and the _ deutsche forschungsgemeinschaft _ ( sfb 230 ) .
the author is grateful to prof .
w. weidlich and dr .
r. reiner for valuable discussions and commenting on the manuscript .                                                 + helbing , d. ( 1992e ) a mathematical model for behavioral changes by pair interactions . in : g. haag , u. mueller , and k. g. troitzsch ( eds . ) economic evolution and demographic change , pp
. 330348 .
springer , berlin .
+ osgood , ch .
e. , and tannenbaum , p.  h. ( 1955 ) the principle of congruity in the prediction of attitude change .
_ psychological review _ * 62 * : 4255 .
+ pearl , r. ( 1924 ) _ studies in human biology_. williams & wilkins , baltimore .