  A recently proposed graph-theoretic metric, the influence gap, has shown to
be a reliable predictor of the effect of social influence in two-party
elections, albeit only tested on regular and scale-free graphs. Here, we
investigate whether the influence gap is able to predict the outcome of
multi-party elections on networks exhibiting community structure, i.e., made of
highly interconnected components, and therefore more resembling of real-world
interaction. To encode communities we build on the classical model of caveman
graphs, which we extend to a richer graph family that displays different levels
of homophily, i.e., how much connections and opinions are intertwined. First,
we study the predictive power of the influence gap in the presence of
communities. We show that when there is no clear initial majority the influence
gap is not a good predictor of the election outcome. When we instead allow for
varying majorities, although the influence gap improves as a predictor,
counting the initial partisan majority does consistently better, across all
levels of homophily. Second, we study the combined effect of the more
predictive metrics, as function of the homophily levels. Using regression
models, we demonstrate that the influence gap combined with the initial votes
count does increase the overall predictive power for some levels of homophily.
Third, we study elections with more than two parties. Specifically, we extend
the definition of the influence gap to any number of parties, considering
various generalisations, and show that the initial votes count has an even
higher predictive power when compared to influence gap than it did in the
two-party case.
