Defeat strength: Difference between revisions
Moved points pertaining to MMPO to a subindent of MMPO. Though the statements apply to MMPO, the claim that every pairwise opposition method passes LNH and FBC and fail Plurality should be cited or shown.
(Moved points pertaining to MMPO to a subindent of MMPO. Though the statements apply to MMPO, the claim that every pairwise opposition method passes LNH and FBC and fail Plurality should be cited or shown.) |
|||
Line 12:
** Example method: Tideman originally defined [[Ranked Pairs]] as a margins method.<ref name="Tideman2">{{Cite journal |last=Tideman |first=T. N. |date=1987-09-01 |title=Independence of clones as a criterion for voting rules |url=https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00433944 |journal=Social Choice and Welfare |language=en |volume=4 |issue=3 |pages=185–206 |doi=10.1007/BF00433944 |issn=1432-217X}}</ref>
* '''pairwise (non)opposition''': number of votes for W≥L, or equivalently 1 - votes for L > W
** Gives even less strategic incentive than wv (satisfies later-no-help and favorite betrayal)▼
** Strong intuitive appeal (pick the candidate opposed by the least voters)
*** A complete unknown can win with no real support, just because everyone forgot to rank them on their ballot.▼
** Example method: [[MMPO]].
▲*** Gives even less strategic incentive than wv (satisfies later-no-help and favorite betrayal).
▲*** Violates [[plurality criterion]]. A complete unknown can win with no real support, just because everyone forgot to rank them on their ballot.
* '''Relative margins''': Defeat strength = margin ÷ (votes for W≠L)
| |||