[EM] Clarifying the definitions

Adam Tarr atarr at purdue.edu
Sat Jan 31 09:47:09 PST 2004

> > Markus also said that the academics always define criteria in terms of
> > actual votes, ballots, rather than mentioning "preference" in the usual
> > sense of that word. Markus prefers that also. However, the fact that others
> > only mention ballots doesn't mean that it's somehow improper to refer to
> > preferences.
>Election methods are usually defined as a function from a given input
>(e.g. a set of partial rankings of the candidates) to a given output
>(e.g. a probability distribution on the set of candidates). Where this
>input comes from is of no concern for the analysis of this election

This is, in my opinion, the crucial difference between the (non-academic) 
criteria that Mike uses, and the standard academic criteria.  Normal 
academic criteria essentially tell you something about how a method handles 
a certain set of ballots.  Criteria like FBC or SFC deal with initial 
preferences, and allow them to change when they become ballots in the method.

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list