# [EM] Seeking co-author for paper on SODA, chicken dilemma, and Mturk experiments

Jameson Quinn jameson.quinn at gmail.com
Tue Feb 14 17:22:40 PST 2012

```I'm currently spending about 15hrs/week writing a paper on voting theory.
It's lonely work; it would help me to have someone to talk to occasionally.
Also, when it comes to publishing it, I'm sure that an experienced academic
would have useful pointers.

The paper is in 4 sections:

1. Introduction; the goals of voting system design. Basically, I support
Bayesian Regret, but stress how it's important to have a realistic strategy
model, and thus the strategic sensitivity of the method is key.

2. SODA definition and properties <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Homunq>.
Although all the math is elementary (finite, discrete, perfect-knowledge
game theory), some of the proofs are non-trivial (for instance, ~4
logically distinct possibilities, united by an outer induction step).

3. Chicken dilemma; why it's a general problem for voting systems.
Distinction between majority Condorcet, where there can be a unique winner
for any strong Nash equilibria; and non-majority Condorcet situations like
the Chicken dilemma, in some of which any Majority-Criterion voting system
will have strong Nash equilibria with different winners. Second-level
strategy; how it can be strategic for one faction to deliberately
destabilize an equilibrium.

4. MTurk results: MTurkers are given 9-voter elections with realistic
Chicken-Dillema-based payoffs (in small amounts of real money); how do they
resolve it under various election rules, and which election rule best
allows maximum utility/minimum BR. Plurality, IRV, Approval, Range, MJ,
Schulze, and SODA are tested.

I know that this is pretty ambitious for a single paper; a logical split
would be two papers, one for parts 1+2 and one for 3+4. But the first would
be hard to publish (who cares about my new proposed election rule, even if
it does have interesting properties<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Homunq>),
while the second would lack any citations or context for SODA.

Anyway... I'm looking for a coauthor. Desirable characteristics (in
decreasing order of importance)

- Availability about 1 hour per week to discuss this, on google+ hangout
or skype.
- General compatibility in terms of voting theory outlook. You can't be
completely anti-SODA, for instance.
- Experience publishing peer-reviewed work. Existing papers on related
topics a plus.
- Similar time zone (I'm in Guatemala, which is Central time. Anything
in the Americas would work.)
- Familiarity with relevant literature. Voting theory, game theory,
and/or behavioral economics...
- Erdos number. I don't have one. I (almost) don't care how low it is.

So, if you or someone you know fulfills these characteristics, and would be
willing to help me out and serve as a sounding board, let me know. And if
you have any other comments on the basic structure of the paper, you can
respond either here on the list or privately to me.

Jameson
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20120214/c3e121d8/attachment-0002.htm>
```