[EM] Decisiveness of MTM & Schulze
Steve Eppley
SEppley at alumni.caltech.edu
Sat Jun 3 17:17:17 PDT 2000
In a message I posted earlier today, I retracted a claim made a
few months ago that MTM is more decisive than Schulze. But the
claim may be correct.
My memory isn't adequate for me to be sure what was in my mind
when I originally made that claim. I wrote earlier today about
the minor discrepancy between MTM's definition and the faster
algorithm used by my software. But upon further reflection, I
probably also based the claim on a consideration of scenarios
such as the following:
5 alternatives.
A & B & C are clones.
A & B & C cycle mildly (CA51,AB52,BC53).
A & B & C beat D solidly (60).
D beats E solidly (61).
E beats A & B & C moderately (55).
Schulze chooses A & B & C. The strongest beatpaths from clone
to clone all have a strength of 55, swamping the information
which distinguishes between clones.
But MTM doesn't neglect the information which distinguishes
between the clones. MTM chooses A since the MTM-dominant
ranking is ABCDE. (The ABCDE ranking thwarts only the 55's and
the 51.)
So MTM appears to be more decisive than Schulze, without
compromising its complete independence of clones.
---Steve (Steve Eppley seppley at alumni.caltech.edu)
More information about the Election-Methods
mailing list