[EM] RE : Re: Greatest Majority Consent

Kevin Venzke stepjak at yahoo.fr
Sat Mar 24 11:11:23 PDT 2007


--- Forest W Simmons <fsimmons at pcc.edu> a écrit :
> >--- Forest W Simmons <fsimmons at pcc.edu> a ?crit?:
> >> This method has the same relationship to Beatpath that MMPO has to 
> >> MinMax.
> >
> >So it's Schulze(pairwise opposition)?
> Not quite, because Schulze(pairwise opposition) would eliminate edges 
> that were not actual defeats.

That's not how I understand that... Otherwise I don't see the difference
between Schulze(po) and Schulze(wv).

> In GMC, if there are lots of equal ranks, then the majority pairwise 
> consent graph might be a complete digraph.
> For example,
> 45 A, 30 B, 25 C would have a majority consent arrow in both directions 
> for each pair of candidates.

Yes, I understood that.

Incidentally, Woodall calls the level of "consent" for A over B the
"doubly-augmented gross score" for A over B. He calls MMPO "MinDAGS."

I believe what he calls "DminDAGS" is equivalent to the method you're
talking about, in which case it should satisfy plurality, majority for
solid coalitions, and clone independence, but not Condorcet or LNHarm.

Kevin Venzke


Découvrez une nouvelle façon d'obtenir des réponses à toutes vos questions ! 
Profitez des connaissances, des opinions et des expériences des internautes sur Yahoo! Questions/Réponses 

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list