Alabama paradox: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
m (Add backreference to house monotonicity, remove link to "Alabama") |
Dr. Edmonds (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Wikipedia|Apportionment paradox#Alabama paradox}}
{{merge|House monotonicity criterion}}
The '''Alabama Paradox''' refers to the pathological scenario of the [[Hamilton method]] in which an increase in the total number of seats in the legislature would cause an electoral district or political party to lose a seat. It is an example of [[House monotonicity criterion|House monotonicity]] failure.▼
▲The '''Alabama Paradox''' refers to the pathological scenario of the [[Hamilton method]] in which an increase in the total number of seats in the legislature would cause an electoral district or political party to lose a seat. It is an example of [[House monotonicity criterion|House monotonicity]] failure and can be understood through the [[Balinski–Young theorem]].
For example:
| |||