<div dir="auto">Here's an example of another standard test case for Sink Swap Bubble ("Bubba" for short).<div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">48 C</div><div dir="auto">28 A>B</div><div dir="auto">24 B (sincere is B>A)</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The smallest faction has thrown the sincere CW under the bus ... knowing that most Condorcet methods, including classical wv methods like Ranked Pairs, would break the resulting ABCA beat cycle at the weakest defeat A>B, leaving B as the winner.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The agenda, whether based on Implicit Approval or MaxPairwiseSupport or the ratio of Favorite to Anti-favorite lottery probabilities ... has B on the favorable end with greatest Implicit Approval and MaxPS values of 52 ... as well as greatest ratio of f to f', because f'(B)=0 ... while A is at the unfavorable end of the lottery in all three standard measures.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The order from worst to best is A C B.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Standard SPE and DMC make no change in this order because it is a beatpath order B>C>A ... so no out of order pair.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Let's see what Bubba does:</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Sink does nothing.</div><div dir="auto">Swap changes the order to A<B<C.</div><div dir="auto">Bubble changes the order to B<A<C ... the finish order of the method ... thus disappointing the defecting faction with a finish order polar opposite to their sincere preferences ... </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">When will they learn that you cannot mess with Bubba?</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Check; </div><div dir="auto">One more Swap Bubble combo step produces the challenge order ...</div><div dir="auto">C<B<A, which the majority will support in the conclusive sincere pairing ... because A is the sincere CW and C is the sincere Condorcet Loser.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">A note on conventional agenda lingo: traditionally the "Top of the agenda" is the unfavorable end ... because it is an elimination agenda ... and the top priority items for elimination are the items at the bad end of the agenda.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">We respect this tradition, but mainly avoid confusion by referring to favorable vs unfavorable ... or good vs bad ends of the list, rather than top or bottom.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Does that make sense?</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Maybe next time we can talk about the f/f' ratio if anybody wants to ... I already did in another thread on agenda setting, but it certainly bears repeating wherever there is interest.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Here I will just explain why f'(B)=0 in the above example.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">If you draw a ballot at random B will never be at the bottom of the ballot unless it is tied for last with A ... so the tie can only be broken by a B ballot which has only A and C at Bottom.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">In sum, A and C have positive anti-favorite probabilities ... but B does not.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">In general, determination of these probabilities involves a Markov Process ... so don't be surprised if the probabilities don't just jump out at you.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Alternatively, instead of resolving ties by drawing additional ballots ... one can use a spinner to choose randomly among the tied (for bottom) candidates ... which is the same as symmetric completion or counting equal bottom fractionally instead of whole.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">In this case you would get ...</div><div dir="auto">f'(B)=24%, f'(A)=24%+12%,=36%,</div><div dir="auto">and f'(C)=28%+12% ... which should add up to 100%.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Yes, 24+24+12+28+12=60+40=100</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The respective ratios of f to f' are</div><div dir="auto">28/36 for A, 24/24 for B, and 48/36 for C ... so the agenda order would be ...</div><div dir="auto">A<B<C.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Sink changes that to A<C<B</div><div dir="auto">Swap changes that to A<B<C</div><div dir="auto">Bubble changes that to B<A<C</div><div dir="auto">Etc. You gotta get up early to sneak a fast one past Bubba!</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">-Forest </div><div dir="auto"><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Mar 31, 2023, 9:49 PM Forest Simmons <<a href="mailto:forest.simmons21@gmail.com">forest.simmons21@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto">I would like to run by you guys an example of a new type of agenda based method that returns a beatpath finish order.<div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The input is precisely the same input needed for Sequential Pairwise Elimination ... namely an agenda of alternatives, along with a pairwise win loss tie table.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The SPE finish order is obtained by bubble sorting the agenda order pairwise.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">To pairwise sort a list of alternatives you repeatedly rectify adjacent pairs that are out of order pairwise ... until there no longer remain any adjacent pairs out of order ... the same way drill sergeants get the new 'cruits lined up in order of height for their manual of arms and marching drill. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">When rectification priority is given to out of order pairs closer to the unfavorable end of the agenda, we call the pairwise sort a "bubble sort." </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The SPE finish order is the order of the bubble Sorted agenda.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">On the other hand, when rectification priority is given to pairs nearer the favorable end of the agenda, the process is called"sink sorting".</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The head of the sink sort finish order is called the "Definitive Majority Choice" (DMC) alternative.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"> Both the SPE and DMC finish orders are vulnerable to burial and "chicken defection" gambits ... to which the following brand new agenda processing method seems to be highly resistant:<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">After sink sorting the agenda, (perversely!) transpose the pair at the favorable end of the resulting list ... before a final bubble sort to arrive at the final finish order.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">In stack based Reverse Polish Notation lingo, we could call the method ...</div><div dir="auto">"Agenda Sink Swap Bubble."</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">This method satisfies Independence from Smith Dominated Alternatives ISDA, because both Sink and Bubble move Smith solidly to the favorable end of the list.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Example: </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">45 A>B(Sincere A>C)</div><div dir="auto">30 B>C</div><div dir="auto">25 C>A</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The A faction seems to be counting on an agenda order of (unfavorable to favorable) C B A, which would result in a win for A, which is both the SPE and DMC winner, not to mention Classical Condorcet(winning votes) winner.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">But under Agenda Sink Swap Bubble (ASSB) ...</div><div dir="auto">the Sink does nothing because no adjacent pair is out of order pairwise.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The Swap transposes the pair located at the favorable (right) end of the list ... resulting in the list C A B.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">"Bubble" starts on the left (unfavorable) end ... resulting in A C B.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">So B ends up at the favorable end of the finish order ... a big disappointment to the A faction buriers.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">This method has a sincerity check:</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Take the finish order and apply another short Swap Bubble combo ... resulting in the order ... "challenge" ... B A C ... with C at the head.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">A fresh binary, conclusive vote (with fresh ballots) is taken to decide once and for all between the original finish order and the challenge finish order ... the question is which of these two finish orders do you prefer?</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Because C is the sincere CW and B is the sincere Condorcet Loser ... it is almost certain that a majority of the participating voters will prefer the challenge order .. which ranks C first and B last.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Clean & Nifty ... or what?</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Try it out on your favorite scenario involving a burial or chicken defection.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Thanks!</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">-Forest</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div></div>
</blockquote></div>