[EM] Re: Nanson and Borda

[Rob LeGrand]

Joseph Malkevitch wrote:
> If one uses preferential ballots where there is no indifference allowed 
> in ranking the candidates, and if one gives points to the candidates 
> where the number of points that candidate i gets for a particular ballot 
> is the number of candidates ranked below candidate i on that ballot, 
> then this is what I will mean by the Borda Count. If one "sequentially" 
> eliminates candidates based on currently having the lowest Borda count, 
> and eliminates that candidate from the ballots and recomputes the Borda 
> Count until one obtains a winner, this is what I will mean by Nanson's 
> Method.

I call this method Baldwin to reserve the name Nanson for the method that
eliminates all candidates with below-average Borda counts at each step;
this usage is taken from Dimitri Vandercruyssen's paper "Analysis of Voting
Procedures in One-Seat Elections: Condorcet Efficiency and Borda
Efficiency" at
http://www.econ.kuleuven.ac.be/ew/admin/Publications/DPS99/DPS9911.pdf . 
Both methods always choose the voted Condorcet winner when it exists and
always choose from the Smith set regardless.  Nanson is superior to Baldwin
in social utility given sincere votes according to my simulations.

=====
Rob LeGrand, psephologist
rob at approvalvoting.org
Citizens for Approval Voting
http://www.approvalvoting.org/

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com