[EM] proposal: weighted pairwise comparison
Dgamble997 at aol.com
Dgamble997 at aol.com
Thu Jun 10 15:13:02 PDT 2004
Brian Bolsom wrote about the following examples:
45 A 100 > B 70 > C 0
10 B 100 > A 70 > C 0
5 B 100 > C 70> A 0
40 C 100 > B 70 > A 0
45 A 100 > B 10 > C 0
10 B 100 > A 90 > C 0
5 B 100 > C 90 > A 0
40 C 100 > B 10 > A 0
>Yup. Both are decided by plain Condorcet, which only considers rankings
>not ratings, and B wins. Of the methods on my Election Calculator, only
>IRV selects A. B is the compromise candidate. Everyone is happy enough
>with B
>In your second example, B being devalued and B-voters throwing in more
>with A, IRNR picks this up and selects A (rank-only methods other than IRV
>still choose B):
Thanks for putting my examples into your Election Calculator. One question
though, how does it translate the cardinal ratings into Approval ballots?
Your Election Calculator translates both examples into the Approval result:
A 55
B 100
C 45
Surely using the zero information strategy of "approve all candidates whose
cardinal rating is greater than the mean cardinal rating" the second example
should give the Approval result:
A 55
B 15
C 45
David Gamble
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20040610/99f87b7a/attachment-0003.htm>
More information about the Election-Methods
mailing list