Cardinal voting systems: Difference between revisions
clean up (AWB), typos fixed: 0-5 → 0–5, ’s → 's
Dr. Edmonds (talk | contribs) |
Psephomancy (talk | contribs) (clean up (AWB), typos fixed: 0-5 → 0–5, ’s → 's) |
||
Line 5:
Cardinal voting is when each voter can assign a numerical score to each candidate. Strictly speaking, cardinal voting can pass more information than the ordinal (rank) voting. This can clearly be seen by the fact that a rank can be derived from a set of numbers provided there are more possible numbers than candidates. A distinction should be made between the "pure" cardinal methods Approval Voting and Score Voting, and "semi-cardinal" methods, such as STAR Voting and all other cardinal methods. Most of this article discusses the properties that pure cardinal methods pass. Unlike ordinal voting, [[W:Arrow's Impossibility Theorem|Arrow's Impossibility Theorem]] does not apply to pure cardinal methods. Furthermore, all pure cardinal methods satisfy the participation criterion.
In pure Cardinal voting, if any set of voters increase a candidate's score, it obviously can help him, but cannot hurt him. That is a restatement of monotonicity. It is a stricter requirement than Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives so it is satisfied as well. As such, a
While in all systems all votes are actually counted, there is a psychological effect to the feeling that the vote “does not count” in a wasted vote situation. Pure cardinal voting is likely to maximize the number of people who vote for a candidate to become the representative. This is expected to have a knock-on effect of better acceptance of results and higher voter turnout.
Line 38:
! Method !! Aggregation !! Gradation
|-
| [[Score Voting]]|| [[Utilitarian winner
|-
| [[Approval Voting]] || [[Utilitarian winner
|-
| [[STAR voting]] || [[STAR voting
|-
| [[Median Ratings]]|| Median || > 2
|-
| [[Majority Choice Approval]]|| Median || [[Approval Voting
|-
| [[Majority Approval Voting]]|| Median || [[Approval Voting
|}
== [[Multi-Member Systems|Multi-Member Methods]]==
===[[Block voting
Bloc Methods find the candidate set with the most support or the most votes overall. The number of seats up for election is determined and the top candidates are elected to fill those seats.
* '''Bloc Approval Voting''': Each voter chooses (no ranking) as many candidates as desired. Only one vote is allowed per candidate. Voters may not vote more than once for any one candidate. Add all the votes. Elect the candidates with the most votes until all positions are filled.
* '''Bloc Score Voting''': Each voter scores all the candidates on a scale with three or more units. Starting the scale at zero is preferable. Add all the scores. Elect the candidates with the highest total score until all positions are filled.
* '''Bloc STAR Voting''': Each voter scores all the candidates on a scale from
===Sequential [[Proportional representation
Sequential Cardinal Systems elect winners one at a time in sequence using a candidate selection method and a reweighting mechanism. The single-winner version of the selection is applied to find the first winner, then a reweighting is applied before the selection of the next and subsequent winners. A reweighting is applied to either the ballot or the scores for the ballot itself. The purpose of the reweighting phase is to ensure that the [[Proportional representation|
{| class="wikitable"
Line 67:
! System !! Gradation !! Selection !! Reweight
|-
| [[Reweighted Range Voting]] || > 2 || [[Utilitarian winner
|-
| [[w:Sequential proportional approval voting|Sequential proportional approval voting]] || [[Approval Voting
|-
| [[Sequentially Spent Score]] || > 2|| [[Utilitarian winner
|-
| [[Allocated Score]] || > 2|| [[Utilitarian winner
|-
| [[Sequential Monroe]] || > 2|| Highest Sum in a Hare Quota || [[Allocated Score
|-
| [[Sequential Ebert]] || [[Approval Voting
|}
===[https://rangevoting.org/QualityMulti.html Optimal] [[Proportional representation
Optimal Systems select all winners at once by optimizing a specific desirable metric for proportionality. First a "quality function" or desired outcome is determined, and then an algorithm is used to determine the winner set that best maximizes that outcome. In most systems this is done by permuting to all possible winner sets not a [[W: Mathematical optimization
* [https://rangevoting.org/QualityMulti.html Harmonic Voting]
|