Ranked Choice Including Pairwise Elimination: Difference between revisions

m
Mutual majority: add link to sequential loser-elimination method article for mutual majority proof
(Linking to 2009 Burlington mayoral election here on electowiki, rather than the English Wikipedia article)
m (Mutual majority: add link to sequential loser-elimination method article for mutual majority proof)
 
(4 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 106:
 
* [[Condorcet loser criterion|Condorcet loser]]: pass
* [[Majority criterion|Majority]]: failpass
* [[Majority loser criterion|Majority loser]]: failpass
* Mutual majority: [[Sequential loser-elimination method#Criteria|pass]]
* Resolvable: pass
* Polytime: pass
Line 112 ⟶ 115:
 
* [[Condorcet criterion|Condorcet]]: fail
* [[Majority criterion|Majority]]: fail
* [[Majority loser criterion|Majority loser]]: fail
* Mutual majority: fail
* [[Smith criterion|Smith]]/[[ISDA]]: fail
* Cloneproof: fail
* LIIA: fail
* IIA: fail
* Cloneproof: fail
* Monotone: fail
* Consistency: fail
Line 127:
* Participation: fail
* No favorite betrayal: fail
It is* [[Summability criterion|summableSummable]]: with O(N<sup>2</sup>).fail
 
It is [[Summability criterion|summable]] with O(N<sup>2</sup>).
 
== RCIPE STV ==
Line 147 ⟶ 146:
 
If a jurisdiction has laws that allow a ballot to have decimal influence amounts that range between zero and one, the above rules can be simplified to use decimal influence values.
 
== External links ==
 
* [https://github.com/cpsolver/VoteFair-ranking-cpp/blob/master/rcipe_stv.cpp RCIPE_STV software that calculates RCIPE and RCIPE STV methods]
 
[[Category:Sequential loser-elimination methods]]
[[Category:Ranked voting methods]]
1,196

edits