[EM] Introducing Pivot

[Carl Schroedl]

Ah! I re-read an earlier message and saw that you already have a GitHub
account (https://github.com/kristomu). Cool! I'm happy to collaborate
either way.

Cheers!

On Thu, Feb 28, 2019, 6:10 PM Carl Schroedl <carlschroedl at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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/20190228/4aa06860/attachment.html>