[EM] Re: Scott--BeatpathWinner & CSSD

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

Scott--

I'd said:

>But they always give the same results as eachother, so they're said to be 
>equivalent.
>

You ask:

If they're exactly equivalent, why even care about the less simple
algorithm?

I reply:

For a very good reason: The CSSD definiton, CSSD's verbal definition, the 
one that I posted yesterday, has much more natural and obvious motivation 
and justification than BeatpathWinner's definition.

...even though BeatpathWinner has a much simpler and briefer computer 
program than CSSD or SSD or Ranked-Pairs does.

As I said, my experience is that SSD's definition is natural and compelling 
for people. That's probably because the Schwartz set is more natural and 
compelling than cycles or beatpaths.

After I posted yesterday, it occurred to me that I didn't speak clearly 
about BeatpathWinner vs CSSD, and, even before I noticed your posting, I was 
going to post again today to clarify that.

Mike Ossipoff

_________________________________________________________________
Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! 
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/