
3
LTD is socially oblivious in the sense that once an im-
balanced triad is selected, the edge to be flipped is cho-
sen according to a (stochastic) rule that disregards the
rest of the network. Moreover, the guarantees of LTD
on the expected time to reach a balanced state are not
very plausible: it was shown in [28] that if p < 1
2, then
the expected time grows exponentially with the size of
the signed graph. On the other hand, if p > 1
2, then
the dynamics is more likely to create rather than remove
friendships and it reaches utopia with high probability.
This means that the eventual balanced state is essentially
pre-determined.
B. Constrained Triad Dynamics
The Constrained Triad Dynamics (CTD) is another
dynamics on signed graphs. Given a signed graph Gon
nvertices, CTD is a random process that starts in G
and repeats the following procedure until there are no
imbalanced triads in G:
1. Select an imbalanced triad ∆uniformly at random.
2. Select an edge eof ∆uniformly at random.
3. Flip eif re≥1
2n−1, that is, if the number of
imbalanced triads in Gdoes not increase upon the
flip (in the case of equality, the flip happens with
probability 1/2), otherwise do nothing.
Note that CTD introduces a non-local, socially-aware
rule: When deciding whether a selected edge should be
flipped, we take into account all triads that contain it.
In [28] it was claimed that, starting from any initial
signed graph G, CTD converges to a balanced state and
that balance is reached fast – in a time that scales loga-
rithmically with the size nof the signed graph. If true,
this would imply that CTD overcomes the limitation of
LTD in which the expected convergence time could be
exponential in n. However the claim, which was sup-
ported by an informal argument, is not quite true, since
the energy landscape is rugged: There are states, called
jammed states, that are not balanced but where CTD can
not make a move, since any flip would (temporarily) in-
crease the number of imbalanced triads [27]. Moreover, it
is known that there are at least roughly 3njammed states
(compared to roughly 2nbalanced states) and that some
of the jammed states have zero energy [26].
III. REACHING AND ESCAPING THE
JAMMED STATES
Even though there are exponentially many jammed
states, computer simulations on small populations were
used to suggest that they can effectively be ignored [27].
In contrast, in this section we present three results which
indicate that for large population sizes the jammed states
are important.
First (“counting”), we study the number of jammed
states. It is known [27], that there are at least 3njammed
states, that is, at least exponentially many. Here we con-
struct a family of simple, previously unreported jammed
states and we show that the total number of jammed
states on nlabeled vertices is super-exponential, namely
at least 2Ω(nlog n). This shows that even on the loga-
rithmic scale, the jammed states are substantially more
numerous than the balanced states (of which there are
“only” 2n−1).
Our second result (“reaching”) shows that, starting
from any initial signed graph that is not too friendship-
dense, a specific jammed state J, which we construct
below, is reached with positive probability. In partic-
ular this implies that the expected time to balance in
this stochastic process is formally infinite, even for signed
graphs that have a constant positive density of friendship
edges.
Our third result (“escaping”) shows that this specific
jammed state Jforms a deep well in the energy land-
scape: Once it is reached, it can not be escaped even if
we perturb a constant portion of edges incident to each
vertex.
In the rest of this section, we sketch the intuition be-
hind these results. For the formal statements and proofs,
see Theorems 2 to 4 in Appendix A, respectively.
Regarding the first result (“counting”), the new
jammed states are defined in terms of an integer param-
eter d. We partition the population into 4d+ 2 clusters
(4d+ 1 or 4d+ 3 would work too), arrange the clus-
ters along a circle, and assign a sign +1 to those (and
only those) edges that connect individuals who live in
clusters that are at most dsteps apart, see Fig. 2. We
then show that, for each friendship or enmity edge (u, v),
a strict majority 2(d+ 1) >1
2(4d+ 3) of clusters have
the property that any vertex win that cluster forms a
balanced triad (u, v, w)with (u, v). Thus, flipping (u, v)
would increase the number of imbalanced triads. When
all the clusters are roughly equal in size, which is the
typical behavior for large population sizes, the state is
thus jammed. Our construction also resolves in affirma-
tive an open question [26] which asks whether there exist
jammed states with an even number of friendship cliques
(here this number is 4d+ 2).
FIG. 2. A jammed state consisting of 4d+ 2 roughly equal
clusters, each connected by friendships to the clusters at most
dsteps apart.
Regarding the second result (“reaching”), we consider
any initial state Inon nvertices in which each vertex
is incident to at most n/12 −1edges labeled +1. We