|
|
|
* <math display="inline">V(A \or B)</math> ... number of voters who approve A or B or both
Let's say that there is a function <math>P:C \times C \to [0, 1]</math>which returns the probabilitythat thatmaps two given candidates to the probability that they belong to the same political faction. Then for a given candidate ''A'', the expected number of elected candidates belonging to the same faction equals <math display="inline">\sum_{X \in W} P(A,X)</math> and ''A''<nowiki/>'s voter efficiency equals <math display="inline">\frac{\sum_{X \in W} P(A,X)}{V(A)}</math>. If ''A'' is not already elected then we can calculate the ''A''<nowiki/>'s voter efficiency after ''A''<nowiki/>'s election as <math display="inline">\frac{1+\sum_{X \in W} P(A,X)}{V(A)}</math>. Let's call <math display="inline">\frac{V(A)}{1+\sum_{X \in W} P(A,X)}</math> ''A''<nowiki/>'s score and <math display="inline">\frac{1+\sum_{X \in W}P(A,X)}{V(A)}</math> ''A''<nowiki/>'s inverse score. If we keep electing candidates whose inverse score is at least as low as inverse [[Hare quota]] then we can expect an outcome where each winner's voter efficiency is below a certain limit aka a proportional outcome.
In practice, electing a candidate whose inverse score is at least as low as inverse Hare quota will not always be possible. In that case we need to either add fail-safe approvals which we previously didn't consider or elect the candidate with the lowest inverse score and hope it is low enough.
|