|
Generalizations...
|
Stéphane Rouillon
|
Apr 11, 2002 22:22 PDT
|
Hello,
I am an engineer, finishing my Ph.D. in applied mathematics,
and I got interested by election methods because it is becoming
a subject of actuality in Québec lately.
I have read your archives (yes all of it !) and I am
particulary interested by the weighted version of ranked
pairs proposed by Mr. Bram Cohen, if I am not wrong.
1) Could someone summarize how it works with words
not with the code to help me understand it better?
2) I do not understand why some people prefer using all votes
in favor of one of the pairwise representative instead of margins.
Mr. Ossipoff pretends it is better to counter the lesser-of-2-evils
problem. Could someone explain ?
I think it is related to truncated preferential ballot
because if all votes provide a full list, margins and
approval give the same results.
This seems a false problem to me.
3) I am able to find some kind of graph explanation for Mr. Tideman
rule. If all vote and representative are sincere I think
a different method gives a more fair norm (one I believe
to be more fair) to identify the best solution. However,
if you put strategy as an issue, I fall back to Mr. Tideman
proposal as a better (more fair) ranking procedure.
However this other method would need a small branch-and-bound
tree to solve the problem, fast but complex to code...
4) I think ranked pair is the best method, I have seen.
However, I would propose some additional generalizations.
First I need a solution that produce ranked weights to
replace an IRV-alike weigth procedure. I have developped
my own and I would like to compare with Mr. Cohen's work.
5) Second, I would like the generalized version to mimic the
rallying procedure of IRV, because it is the only way
to counter the vote-splitting problem I can think of.
6) Finally, I think ties could be handled differently.
I will tell you all about it, after you get a first occasion to comment.
Please give me some feedback about your work and
mathematical level, so I can adapt the assumed knowledge for
future discussions.
Necessity is the mother of invention,
Stéphane Rouillon
stephane.-@sympatico.ca
|
|
 |
|
