[EM] Uncovered set methods (Re: How close can we get to the IIAC)

[fsimmons at pcc.edu]

----- Original Message -----
From: Kristofer Munsterhjelm
...
>
> That's UncAAO, right? I've considered adding it to my simulator,
> but I'm
> unsure of where the simulated voters should put the approval
> cutoff.

Yes.  I'm glad someone remembers UncAAO.

I suggest using truncation as the approval cutoff, and using the same
truncations that you do for Schulze wv.

By the way, (contrary to Marcus' confusion) UncAAO does satisfy  Monotonicity,
Clone Independence, IDPA, and Independence from Non-Smith Alternatives, as well
as the following:

1.  It elects the same member of a clone set as the method would when restricted
to the clone set.

2.  If a candidate that beats the winner is removed, the winner is unchanged.

3.  If an added candidate covers the winner, the new candidate becomes the new
winner.

4.  If the old winner covers an added candidate, the old winner still wins.

5.  It always chooses from the uncovered set.

6.  It is easy to describe:  Initialize L to be an empty list.  While there
exists some alternative that covers every member of L,  add to L the one (from
among those) ranked on the greatest number of ballots.  Elect the last candidate
added to L. 

What other deterministic method (based on ranked ballots with truncations
allowed) satisfies all of these criteria?