[EM] Beatpath winner
Kevin Venzke
stepjak at yahoo.fr
Wed Oct 15 14:56:06 PDT 2003
Andrew,
--- Andrew Myers <andru at cs.cornell.edu> a écrit :
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 03:51:37PM -0400, Eric Gorr wrote:
> > Do you agree that if an alternative does pairwise beat every other
> > alternative that it should win?
>
> Understood and agreed. But both of those conditions are still met if we
> allow beatpaths to go "backwards" along links with the strength of the
> losing votes. It comes down to the definition of what a beatpath is,
> and it seems that either way of doing things will resolve the cycles in
> the graph. I'm wondering if there is a simple argument that the usual
> definition is "right".
It looks like Rob provided a simple argument:
2 B>C>A
3 A>BC
3 AB>C
3 C>AB
Although A beats all, if a beatpath can use losing paths, B's beatpath to A
is stronger than A's to B.
Specifically, A has paths 2 to B and 6 to C, and C's path to B is also 2.
B beats C with 5 votes, and can crawl up the A>C path which is still strength
5.
Thus we cut the losing paths to ensure that a beats-all candidate will win.
Kevin Venzke
stepjak at yahoo.fr
___________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français !
Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com
More information about the Election-Methods
mailing list