Condorcet method: Difference between revisions
→Key terms in ambiguity resolution
No edit summary |
|||
Line 56:
*# every candidate inside the set is pairwise unbeatable by any other candidate outside the set, i.e., ties are allowed
*# no proper (smaller) subset of the set fulfills the first property
* '''[[Independence of clone alternatives|Cloneproof]]''': a method that is immune to the presence of '''clones''' (candidates which are essentially identical to each other). In some voting methods, a party can increase its odds of selection if it provides a large number of "identical" options. A cloneproof voting method prevents this attack. See [[strategic nomination]]
*[[Defeat strength]]: Different ways of measuring how strong a pairwise defeat is.
== Different ambiguity resolution methods ==
Line 80 ⟶ 81:
**'''[[Baldwin]]''' computes the [[Borda count]] for all candidates, then iteratively deletes (eliminates) the candidate with the lowest count.
<sup>1</sup> There are different ways to measure the strength of each defeat in some methods; see the [[Defeat strength|defeat strength]] article. Some use the margin of defeat (the difference between votes for and votes against), while others use winning votes (the votes favoring the defeat in question).
Electionmethods.org argues that there are several disadvantages of systems that use margins instead of winning votes.
The website argues that using margins "destroys" some information about majorities, so that the method can no longer honor information about what majorities have determined and that consequently margin-based systems cannot support a number of desirable voting properties.
| |||