[EM] "Independence of cycles" and a possible new method.

Toby Pereira tdp201b at yahoo.co.uk
Sun Dec 12 10:14:07 PST 2021

 I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that Saari named the criterion already. As Kristofer pointed out, my proposed method would fail Condorcet, but deliberately. I'm not sure what criteria it might pass or fail generally, but I think it's interesting to look at other methods that might pass Saari's criterion, since the Borda Count is pretty terrible.
    On Sunday, 12 December 2021, 16:56:58 GMT, Kristofer Munsterhjelm <km_elmet at t-online.de> wrote:  
 On 12.12.2021 17:35, Colin Champion wrote:
> Is "independence of cycles" not the same as Saari's "neutral Condorcet
> requirement"? (mentioned in Risse's paper "Why the Count de Borda cannot
> beat the Marquis de Condorcet"). The matter is discussed in Pacuit's
> Stanford Encyclopedia article. He refers to ballots "cancelling
> properly" and mentions a proof that "there is no Condorcet consistent
> voting method that cancels properly".

I wasn't aware of that paper but yes, now that I've looked at the
definition, you're right.

Election-Methods mailing list - see https://electorama.com/em for list info
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20211212/2010011f/attachment.html>

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list