Talk:Cardinal voting systems: Difference between revisions
→Recent edits: new section
Psephomancy (talk | contribs) (Created page with "Should this just be merged into Category:Cardinal voting methods? ~~~~") |
Psephomancy (talk | contribs) (→Recent edits: new section) |
||
Line 1:
Should this just be merged into [[:Category:Cardinal voting methods]]? — [[User:Psephomancy|Psephomancy]] ([[User talk:Psephomancy|talk]]) 05:28, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
== Recent edits ==
"Score voting has the lowest Bayesian Regret among all common single-winner election methods"
Should always clarify that BR/SUE/VSE are measurements, and that evaluation of methods depends on the assumptions made in the simulations. In other words, distinguish Smith's BR simulations from BR itself, and Quinn's/Merrill's VSE/SUE simulations from VSE/SUE itself. I could run BR simulations with different voter distributions that give different results, for instance.
Also I think it's good to use the term "Score voting" for real-world systems with discrete score levels, and "Range voting" for mathematical simulations with real numbers from 0 to 1, as in the references on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinal_voting#Variants.
— [[User:Psephomancy|Psephomancy]] ([[User talk:Psephomancy|talk]]) 17:46, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
| |||