Anonymous edit from before merge[edit | edit source]
What about Minmax with smith set extraction first and then using margins? What criteria would that pass and fail?
Source references[edit | edit source]
There's a citation needed on the name Simpson-Kramer. What kind of citation is most appropriate: to the Simpson and Kramer papers where they define the method, or to the first source that references these papers and uses the name "Simpson-Kramer"?
- The "least reversal" and "successive reversal" terminology seems to be rather more messy. Both seem to be based on Condorcet's vaguely worded original tiebreaker, but because it's been so vaguely defined, it has been interpreted in many ways: minmax, Kemeny, Ranked Pairs or something entirely different. The interpretation of minmax as successive reversal seems to have come from EM -- e.g. James Green-Armytage's post. I have the impression I saw it listed earlier on either condorcet.org or Ossipoff's site, but I'm not sure. Kristomun (talk) 18:57, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
References[edit | edit source]
- Kramer, Gerald H. (1973). "On a Class of Equilibrium Conditions for Majority Rule". Econometrica. [Wiley, Econometric Society]. 41 (2): 285–297. ISSN 0012-9682. JSTOR 1913490. Retrieved 2023-05-27.
- Simpson, Paul B. (1969). "On Defining Areas of Voter Choice: Professor Tullock on Stable Voting". The Quarterly Journal of Economics. Oxford University Press. 83 (3): 478–490. ISSN 0033-5533. JSTOR 1880533. Retrieved 2023-05-27.
- Caplin, Andrew; Nalebuff, Barry (1988). "On 64%-Majority Rule". Econometrica. [Wiley, Econometric Society]. 56 (4): 787–814. ISSN 0012-9682. JSTOR 1912699. Retrieved 2023-05-27.
- Green-Armytage, J. (2003-08-04). "the name of the rose". Election-methods mailing list archives.