<div dir="auto">It looks like the simplest procedure is to start by eliminating all candidates outside of Smith.<div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Then elect the sincere winner between the Smith MMPO candidate K and the Smth candidate X with the MaxPO against K.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I should have listened to Chris in the first place!</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">To make this method Landau compliant, if K is covered, repeatedly update the candidate variablenK as the candidate that covers K with the least pairwise opposition from the previous value of K. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Then initialize variable X as the candidate with the greatest PO against this final value of K, and repeatedly update it as the candidate that covers its previous value with the greatest pairwise opposition to K.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The sincere runoff is between these two Landau candidates.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">None of this changes the results of our examples, because all candidates were members of the Landau set ... which is the case whenever Smith has fewer than four candidates.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">fws</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Jun 23, 2023, 1:25 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">Before the examples, note that the Condorcet Loser elimination step is redundant because the removal of covered candidates will automatically take care of it.<div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The method thus simplified can be cast as ...</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">0. Elect the Condorcet Winner if there is one. Else ...</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">1. Let K be the candidate with the smallest MaxPO among the remaining candidates.<br></div><div dir="auto">2. Let X be the candidate with the smallest PO against K.</div><div dir="auto">3. Let S be the set of remaining candidates that are currently covered by X.</div><div dir="auto">4. Eliminate every member of S.</div><div dir="auto">5. Eliminate X.</div><div dir="auto">6 Repeat steps one thru five until only two candidate remains.</div><div dir="auto">7. Elect the winner of a sincere runoff between the two remaining candidates.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Note that once any Smith candidate is eliminated, only Smith candidates will remain ... since each Smith candidate covers every candidate outside of Smith.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Example 1.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">45 A>B (sincere A>C)</div><div dir="auto">40 B>C</div><div dir="auto">15 C>A</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The MMPO candidate is A with a maxPO of only 55, frim C.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The candidate with the least PO against A is B, with a PO of only 40 against A.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Candidate B is the only one eliminated because it covers nobody else.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The sincere winner between A and C is C. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Example 2.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">46 A>B</div><div dir="auto">44 B>C</div><div dir="auto">5 C>A</div><div dir="auto">5 C>B</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The MMPO candidate is B whose max opposition is only 51, from A.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The min opposition to B is only ten, from C.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Eliminating C leaves A and B for the runoff.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">If the given ballots are sincere, then A will win.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">But the cycle brings into question the sincerity of the ballots; false cycles are more likely than sincere cycles.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"> If the cycle was caused by B's unilateral burial of A under C... by changing 44 B>A to 44 B>C ... then A wins the sincere comparison, removing the doubt.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">If the cycle was caused by burial of B under A ... by changing 10 C>A to 5 each of C>A and C>B ... then B wins the sincere comparison, and is restored to its rightful place as sincere CW.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Example 3</div><div dir="auto">49 C</div><div dir="auto">26 A>B</div><div dir="auto">25 B</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The MMPO candidate is A based on its second highest PO score of 25 (from B), because A and B were tied for the smallest MaxPO (of 49 from C).</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The candidate with min PO against A is B with 25, (compared to 49 from C).</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">So B is eliminated, leaving the sincere runoff between A and C. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">In this example A wins the sincere comparison 51 to 49.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I hope these examples are sufficient to show how the method works.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">fws</div><div dir="auto"><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Jun 23, 2023, 12:56 AM Forest Simmons <<a href="mailto:forest.simmons21@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">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">Chris has been keeping me humble ... shooting down my worst nonsense ... while Kristofer has been busy cleaning up code ... so watch out for an explosion of progress!<div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Think of the MMPO candidate C as being located in the midst of the other candidates in such a way that the smallest neighborhood centered on C that is large enough to contain the other candidates is as small as possible.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">If you extend a line segment from C to another candidate X on the outskirts of that neighborhood, and then cut that segment with a perpendicular bisecting plane ... that plane will separate the voters closer to X from the voters closer to C. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The number of voters closer to X is known as X's Pairwise Opposition to C in that pairwise contest.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">This imaginary schematic suggests that the candidate X with the least PO to C, would be a good one to eliminate in a single winner method.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Accordingly ... when every candidate suffers at least one pairwise defeat, we suggest the following elimination procedure:</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">While more than two candidates remain ... Eliminate the candidate that is defeated pairwise by all of the other candidates, if there is such a candidate ... Otherwise ...</div><div dir="auto">1. let X be the candidate with the least PO to the candidate C whose Max PO is smallest among the remaining candidates. Then</div><div dir="auto">2. Eliminate X, as well as any candidate(s) covered by X relative to the remaining candidates.</div><div dir="auto">EndWhile </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Finally, elect the sincere runoff winner between the two remaining candidates.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Examples to follow soon ....</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">For now, we only mention that the eliminations are designed to make it highly likely that when a sincere undefeated candidate exists; it will be one of the finalists ... and also to point out that the elimination of candidates covered by other candidates being eliminated ... this precaution ensures that no covered candidate will be elected ... thus avoiding a potential liability that plauges nearly all other extant methods.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">fws</div></div>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>