[EM] Re: Truncation, defeat strength, Landau

[Kevin Venzke]

Adam,

>"While there is no CW, eliminate the Approval loser" would always elect a 
>member of the Smith set, but it would not, strictly speaking, be approval 
>completed Condorcet, since it could elect someone who is neither the 
>approval winner nor the Condorcet winner.

I'm confused by this distinction from the other two methods.  It seems that
all of the methods would elect a CW if there is one, none of them necessarily
pick the Approval winner, and all restrict themselves to Smith set members.
Could you explain differently why this is not "approval-completed Condorcet"?

Maybe you are thinking of the "While there is no majority favorite" variant,
which can eliminate a CW?  But in that case, it seems wrong to say that it
would always elect a Smith set member.


 --- Alex Small <asmall at physics.ucsb.edu> a écrit : 
> Could you comment on the difference between the Smith and Schwartz sets? 
> I always thought the terms were interchangable.  Does the difference
> involve pairwise ties?

I believe that's right.  Smith is the "innermost unbeaten set," and Schwartz
is the set of candidates whose members each have a beatpath to every other
candidate.  I don't believe tying creates a beatpath.

Does anyone know what the Landau set (or method) is?  I believe it is on
Rob LeGrand's webpage, but I can't find anything on it.

Kevin Venzke
stepjak at yahoo.fr


___________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français !
Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com