[EM] Double-ended ICT? That bottom-end feature is what I used to call "Power Truncation".

[Michael Ossipoff]

Or, to put it the other way around, Improved-Condorcet is the top-end
counterpart to Power-Truncation. I used to propose Power-Truncation as
a ballot-option.

There may have been some reason why I abandoned it. Maybe it had some
problem, some violation, or some bad-example embarrassment. I don't
know. Maybe i abandoned it merely because it wouldn't have worked well
with one or more of the methods that i was proposing at that time.

Right now, I don't know of any problem that would result if it were
added to ICT.

Before I specify how it would change the wording of iCT, let me define
a few terms:

(X>Y) is the number of ballots ranking X over Y.

(Y>X) is the number of ballots ranking Y over X.

(X=Y)T is the number of ballots ranking X and Y both at top.

(X=Y)B is the number of ballots ranking X and Y both at bottom.

Double-ended ICT would say:

X beats Y iff (X>Y) + (X=Y)B > (Y>X) + (X=Y)T

Ordinary ICT merely says:

X beats Y iff (X>Y) > (Y>X) + (X=Y)T

Mike Ossipoff






Anyway,