[EM] Part 3, More apportionment
Michael Ossipoff
mikeo2106 at msn.com
Fri Jan 19 02:12:56 PST 2007
Concerning Ossipoff's latest "AR" ("adjusted rounding") apportionment
method,
explained in his post titled
"Detailed (but obvious) instructions for Adjusted-Rounding"
it sounds interesting.
To take a more abstract view of this: it seems to me that what you can
accomplish with
the idea of treating each "cycle" on its own, is to avoid having to use ANY
probabilistic
model.
I reply:
Yes, AR & CW don't need any distribution model. They individually zero-out
(as nearly as possible) each cycle's deviation from s/q=1.
Warren continues:
That's because the probability distribution within one "cycle," is just
the data itself.
We can now round the elements of that cycle, in such a way as to minimize
our
favorite bias
measure.
I reply:
AR & CW both work, in different ways, to minimize each cycle's deviation
from s/q=1.
Mike Ossipoff
More information about the Election-Methods
mailing list