[EM] Introducing Pivot

[Carl Schroedl]

Thanks Kristofer! I hadn't considered developing distinct structures for
relative and absolute scenarios. I have updated the GitHub repo to attempt
to match your proposed structure. How does it look to you?

Since I'm a programmer, and not a social choice theory expert, I'm
confident I'll get something about this wrong, if not now then later :) I'm
happy to continue hashing it out over email. If you or other list members
would like to be a little more hands-on about it, GitHub is a great
platform to collaborate, and not just for code -- people even collaborate
on Washington DC's laws via GitHub
<https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/11/how-i-changed-the-law-with-a-github-pull-request/>.
If you sign up for a free account, you can make a copy of the existing
repository, and make changes to match what you are thinking. Once you are
happy with it, you can propose merging the changes back into the Pivot
Libre organization's repository.

There's a couple of good tutorials here:
https://guides.github.com/activities/hello-world/
https://guides.github.com/activities/forking/

Let me know what you think!


On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 5:02 PM Kristofer Munsterhjelm <km_elmet at t-online.de>
wrote:

> On 18/02/2019 23.28, Carl Schroedl wrote:
> > Hi Kristofer,
> >
> > Thanks again for the example election scenarios. I created a repository
> > for ranked ballot test scenarios on GitHub and added your examples.
> > https://github.com/pivot-libre/ranked-ballot-scenarios/
> >
> > I've been thinking about this project a bit more broadly. In many
> > disciplines it is difficult for engineers to create practical beneficial
> > solutions from science's discoveries. Engineers' implementations can be
> > incorrect or lag behind the latest science. I'm hoping this ranked
> > ballot scenarios repository will make it easy for software engineers to
> > faithfully implement the best and latest election science. Viewed
> > another way, I'm hoping the repository will make it easy for the work of
> > election scientists to be adopted more widely, correctly, and quickly.
> >
> > Does the structure I proposed support that goal? How could it be
> improved?
>
> More to come when I have more time, most likely, but I would suggest
> that property failure examples should have a specific directory or file
> structure.
>
> There are relative and absolute criteria. Absolute criteria go like "in
> any election of this type, that should happen" (e.g. majority: in every
> election where A is ranked top by more than a majority, A should win).
>
> Relative criteria go like "if A wins in this election, and then you
> modify it like this, then A should/shouldn't win in that election". E.g.
> mono-add-top (if A wins, then after adding some ballots ranking A top, A
> should still win) or cloning (crowding: if A wins and you clone B, then
> A should still win; vote-splitting: if A wins and you clone A, then A
> should still win; teaming: if A doesn't win and you clone A, then A
> still shouldn't win).
>
> For absolute criteria, the directory structure you've detailed in the
> readme is probably good enough (e.g.
> "scenarios/borda-majority-failure/"). But for relative criteria
> failures, I would suggest that the file/directory structure makes it
> clear which ballot set is before and which ballot set is after.
>
> E.g.
> ranked-ballot-scenarios/scenarios/smith-minmax-mono-add-top-failure/before/
> (the ballot with the three-candidate Smith set) and
> ranked-ballot-scenarios/scenarios/smith-minmax-mono-add-top-failure/after/
> (after some A-top ballots push C into the Smith set).
>
> The names don't necessarily have to be "before" and "after", but that's
> what first came to mind.
>
> You could possibly further categorize the examples, e.g.
> criterion-failures/mono-add-top/smith-minmax/before/ or
> criterion-failures/smith-minmax/mono-add-top/before/ depending. But
> you'd have to judge how much that obscures the point of the repository.
>


-- 

Carl Schroedl | carlschroedl at gmail.com | http://carlschroedl.com/blog
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20190228/c49a1e40/attachment.html>