<html><head></head><body>By the way, for the mathematically inclined, I think I was mistaken --<br>
I believe the term I meant is Linfinity-normalized. In case I'm still wrong<br>
(it's getting late) I'll clarify this: I mean that the utilities in each set are<br>
shifted to center on the origin and then scaled by a factor equal to the<br>
maximum utility in the set. So instead of (100, 40, 40, 0) we would have<br>
(1, -1/5, -1/5, -1). The point is that each set of utilities should have the<br>
same minimum and maximum.<br>
<br>
Richard Moore wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:3ADE84F7.60000@home.com">
Given your SU rankings (A > C > D > B), it strikes me that you are using a<br>
different definition of SU than I am. When I speak of SU, I am referring to<br>
an L1-normalized SU. Does this contradict an accepted definition of SU?<br>
If we calculate SUs according to this method, then we get (D > B > A > C).<br>
So Approval picked the second-highest SU.<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</body></html>