Method evaluation poll 2005

From Electowiki
(Redirected from Method evaluation poll)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Please rate the following single-winner methods on a scale from 0 to 10, on functional merit alone. That is, leaving the issue of public salability aside, how well will the method perform in a large, contentious electorate? Decimal ratings are allowed.

The answers you give on your first pass through the survey need not be final. Please feel free to change/update your answers as many times as you like. You may leave a question mark next to your score for a given method if you are particularly uncertain about that score, and you may also substitute a question mark for the number if you feel unable to evalute the method.

Feel free to add more methods to the poll, especially interesting ones! This goes without saying, but please don't change other people's ratings! Try to keep the columns tidy so that it's clear whose scores are whose. The format of this poll is based on that of the essential questions poll. Please identify yourself by your initials in the body of the poll, and in the participants section at the top of the poll. This poll will be ongoing; that is, it has no closing date. Also, there is no official tally method, and no official winner will be declared.

the participants[edit | edit source]

JG James Green-Armytage
CB Chris Benham
KV Kevin Venzke
DK Dave Ketchum
MO Mike Ossipoff 
RL Rob Lanphier
JF Jeff Fisher

the methods[edit | edit source]

binary input[edit | edit source]

   JG   CB   KV   DK   MO   RL   JF
Plurality
    2    0    2    2    0    0    0
Two round runoff
    3    3    3    3    0    2    2
Approval
    6    4    8    5    9    5    9
Random Ballot
    0    0    1    1    0    0    2

ranking input[edit | edit source]

not Condorcet-efficient[edit | edit source]

   JG   CB   KV   DK   MO   RL   JF
Borda count     
   1     0    0    0    0    0    4
IRV without equal rankings
   4     7    3    3    0    4    2
ER-IRV(whole)
   6     4    ?    ?    0    ?    2
ER-IRV(fractional)
   6     6    3    ?    0    ?    2
Bucklin without equal rankings
  3?     5    6    0         ?     6
ER-Bucklin(whole)
5.5?    6.5   7         2    ?    4
ER-Bucklin(fractional)
   ?    5?    5              ?    5
Descending Acquiescing Coalitions (DAC)
        3?    4                     
Descending Solid Coalitions
        2?    2

nearly Condorcet-efficient[edit | edit source]

   JG   CB   KV   DK   MO   RL   JF
minmax(pairwise opposition)
    5    3?   4    ?    0   ?    4
CDTT,IRV
    7    5?   5    ?    ?   ?    4
CDTT,minmax(pairwise opposition)
    ?    3?   6    ?    ?   ?    5
Improved Condorcet Approval (ICA), a.k.a. Condorcet//Approval with FBC tweak)
   6?    6?   9    ?    ?   ?    5
Majority Defeat Disqualification Approval (MDDA)
   6?    5?   8        10   ?    6
MDD,ER-Bucklin(whole)
         8?

Condorcet-efficient[edit | edit source]

   JG   CB   KV   DK   MO   RL   JF
ranked pairs(WV)
    7    7    8    8    8    9    8
ranked pairs(margins)
    2    4    3    3    0    6    ?
river(wv)
    7    7     8    7    8    ?    9
Schulze(WV)
    7    7    8    7    8    9    8
Schulze(margins)  
    2    4    3    3    0    5    ?
sequential dropping(WV)
    7    ?    7    ?    5    ?    8
minmax(WV)                  
    4   ?     7    7    4    5    7
minmax(margins)     
    1    ?    3    3    0    5    ?
Smith//minmax(WV)    
    6    ?    7    ?  4.5    9    8
Smith//minmax(margins)
    2    ?    3    ?    0    5    ?
Nanson
  5.5?   ?    3    ?    0    ?    5
Raynaud
   6?    3?    3    3    0    ?    6
Smith,IRV or Schwartz,IRV
         8

ranking input with approval cutoff[edit | edit source]

   JG   CB   KV   DK    MO   RL   JF
definite majority choice a.k.a. ranked approval voting
  6.5  9.5    6    3     1     ?    5
approval weighted pairwise (e.g. with ranked pairs base)
    9    8?    7    3     1    ?    4
approval margins
  5.5   8.5    ?    3     1    ?    ?
democratic fair choice (DFC)
   ?    5?     3    3      1     ?    4
Schwartz//Approval or Smith//Approval (See Condorcet//Approval)
        5?      4           1        10
Condorcet//Approval     
        4?      4            1        10
Definite Majority,IRV
        8

rating input[edit | edit source]

   JG  CB   KV   DK   MO    RL
range voting (ratings summation)
  5.5       5    2   9.1
median ratings
    3       4    2    2
ranked pairs(cardinal pairwise)
  9.5  8?   5    2    5
Schulze(cardinal pairwise)
  9.5  8?   5    2    5
Automated DMC
      10

other[edit | edit source]

   JG  CB   DK   MO
CWO-ER-IRV(whole)
    7  2?    1    4
CWO-ER-IRV(fractional)
    8  3?    1    3
CWO-ranked pairs(WV)
    8        1    5
CWO-ranked ballot plurality
    6  1?    1     1
minmax(pairwise opposition) with AERLO and ATLO
    4  3?     ?     0
MMPO with AERLO, ATLO, & Power Truncation
    ?  0??          0
MMPO with (only) Power Truncation 
    ?  0??          10
Schulze(WV) with AERLO and ATLO
    8  3?      ?    8.5
Schulze(WV) with strong/weak preference option
  7.5  5?      ?       ?
random jury method
    ?  0      1   1

See also[edit | edit source]