[EM] MinMax(wv), Schulze & RP(wv) (MAM) have some autodeterence.

[Michael Ossipoff]

For reasons I’ve mentioned, the CW is the most likely Topcount winner. The
CW faction is the most likely to be the largest.

Sincere rankings of the 3 factions:

CW, or CW>BF, or CW>Bus
Bus> CW
BF> CW

3 burial scenarios, each with the 3 factions’ rankings:

1.

CW
Bus>CW
BF>Bus (burying)

2.

CW>BF
Bus>CW
BF>Bus

3.

CW>Bus
Bus>CW
BF>Bus

The BF & Bus factions, in the example  are equal in size. The CW faction is
larger. In an actual election, it isn’t known which of {Bus, BF} is bigger
than the other, & both possibilities are equiprobable.

In #1, Bus wins because the listed-methods meet Minimal-Defense.  …but you
can verify it, just as you can verify the results in the other 2 scenarios.

Scenario #2:


CW’s larger size gives factions give BF & bus the equally largest wv
against them. The largest wv against CW is less. CW wins.

Scenario #3:

CW’s larger size gives BF two instances of the largest defeat.


CW has an ordinary wv in its defeat, via the 2 smaller factions.

Because CW & Bus factions both rank Bus over BF, & only the BF faction
ranks BF over Bus, Bus pairbeats BF, with the maximal wv.

Bus wins by pairbeating CW & BF.

If CW is the largest faction (it’s the most likely to be the largest) &
nothing else about the burial-result is known, then BF, by the most likely
assumption, loses in all 3 scenarios, while Bus wins in the 3rd scenario.

The method has autodeterence.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20240206/438df009/attachment.htm>