[EM] Efforts to improve on CR's strategy

[Ken Johnson]

>From: Brian Olson <bql at bolson.org>
>Date: Sat, 22 May 2004 23:49:13 -0700
>
>  
>
>>...
>>(2) Apply an additive shift to each voter's CR profile so that the sum 
>>of the absolute values is minimized.
>>...
>>    
>>
>
>With the exception of step 2, I've simulated this.
>
Step 2 is an obvious zero-info strategy that smart voters will do 
anyway, so I think it would make sense to make it automatic.

>
>On this graph it's labeled "Rated Vote, equal sum":
>http://bolson.org/voting/graph/v10000/e0_17.png
>
>It doesn't stand out on the graph, but it's in with the cluster of 
>things at the top which are very near to maximizing social utility. 
>But, that's with simulations of voters casting honest ballots.
>
Does "honest" really mean honest? - no zero-info strategy? For example, 
under Approval, might a voter approve (or disapprove) all candidates?

>
>As Mike O is fond of saying: given honest ballots, straight CR is 
>perfect. So we take steps away from that in order to have a system that 
>is more "fair" or is harder or impossible to cheat. I have a mode in my 
>simulator that runs a few basic strategies against the election 
>methods, but I'm working on adding an AI/ALife system to learn the best 
>strategy against each election method. If the AI learns that honest 
>votes are most likely to get it what it wants, we win.
>
>Brian Olson
>http://bolson.org/
>  
>
Have you tried modeling vote correlations based on voters' views on 
political issues? (e.g., some voters may vote based on the candidates' 
positions on just one or a couple issues, like gun control, 
right-to-life, electoral reform, etc.) I got some (unpleasantly) 
surprising results when I put this into my simulations.

Ken Johnson