[EM] Efforts to improve on CR's strategy

[Kevin Venzke]

Ken,

 --- Ken Johnson <kjinnovation at earthlink.net> a écrit : > 
> I was, until recently, a fanatical advocate of Approval. I tried to 
> demonstrate by empirical simulation the superiority of Approval over 
> rank methods, based on the criterion that the election method should 
> maximize "social utility" as defined by sincere CR. (See my earlier post 
> in Election-methods digest, Vol 1 #597, Message 4.) Unfortunately, it 
> didn't turn out the way I expected. In a single-issue election with many 
> candidates, Approval exhibited abysmal performance, worse than all other 
> methods (including Plurality). So I gave up my crusade. Oh well.

I have to confess that I didn't understand your simulations when you
posted them.  Maybe you recall that I posted some simulation results at
about the same time.

Mine found certain scenarios (i.e., assumptions about voter behavior and
information) where Approval was marginally better than Schulze.  This was 
measured by comparing the sincere CR/social utility of the winners of the 
two methods.

I did not test Plurality.  I think it is very strange that you found it to 
be better than Approval.  I cannot imagine what voter strategy you supposed
for the two methods in order to get that result.  I imagine that Approval
voters would still approve the candidate they would pick under Plurality,
so I take it the voters in your Approval simulations were approving too
many candidates?

Kevin Venzke
stepjak at yahoo.fr


	

	
		
Yahoo! Mail : votre e-mail personnel et gratuit qui vous suit partout ! 
Créez votre Yahoo! Mail sur http://fr.benefits.yahoo.com/

Dialoguez en direct avec vos amis grâce à Yahoo! Messenger !Téléchargez Yahoo! Messenger sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com