| Display title | Balinski–Young theorem |
| Default sort key | Balinski–Young theorem |
| Page length (in bytes) | 4,626 |
| Page ID | 1554 |
| Page content language | en - English |
| Page content model | wikitext |
| Indexing by robots | Allowed |
| Number of redirects to this page | 0 |
| Counted as a content page | Yes |
| Number of subpages of this page | 0 (0 redirects; 0 non-redirects) |
| Edit | Allow all users (infinite) |
| Move | Allow all users (infinite) |
| Delete | Allow all users (infinite) |
| Page creator | Dr. Edmonds (talk | contribs) |
| Date of page creation | 00:18, 26 January 2020 |
| Latest editor | Kristomun (talk | contribs) |
| Date of latest edit | 11:59, 9 March 2022 |
| Total number of edits | 11 |
| Total number of distinct authors | 3 |
| Recent number of edits (within past 180 days) | 0 |
| Recent number of distinct authors | 0 |
| Transcluded template (1) | Template used on this page:
|
Description | Content |
Article description: (description)
This attribute controls the content of the description and og:description elements. | In 1983, two mathematicians, Michel Balinski and Peyton Young, proved that any method of apportionment will result in paradoxes whenever there are three or more parties (or states, regions, etc.).[1][2] The theorem shows that any possible method used to allocate the remaining fraction will necessarily fail to always follow quota. More precisely, their theorem states that there is no apportionment system that has the following 3 properties [3] (as the example we take the division of seats between parties in a system of proportional representation): |
