[EM] RE:MMPO, contd

Simmons, Forest simmonfo at up.edu
Fri Jun 3 18:59:01 PDT 2005


Near the end of his message Mike wrote ...

It seems to me that the first step of sprucing-up was to eliminate every
candidate who isn't in a certain selection set. The set of candidates who
could win without violating BC? And then was that followed immediately by
the collapsing of beat-clone-sets? A two-part procedure?Anyway, I guess I'll
keep looking. But Forest, could you post the full complete definition when
you get a chance to?

Forest replies:
The "certain selection set" evolved over time from Smith, to Uncovered, to Banks, to Duda, to "Minimal Covering Set," and yes, that step was followed by clone collapsing, but I abandoned the spruce up quest for two reasons:
1.  It satisfied Smith, which I came to believe was too restrictive.  [And we suspect that Smith is incompatible with the FBC.]
2. Spruced up random ballot turned out to be non monotonic, due to the restriction to the Uncovered Set (or its more restrictive subsets). And I suspect that clone collapsing by itself could also impair monotonicity; I'm not sure.
So the method never came to a definitive form. 
The nearest it came to a definitive form was in a posting that I wrote in reply to somebody that wanted to do a Wiki page on it.  I'll try to find that if you want me to.  Ted Stern was following the discussion pretty closely back then; perhaps he can find it.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 4707 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20050603/e0c065d3/attachment-0002.bin>

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list