4,193
edits
User:RobLa/runoff: Difference between revisions
Moved reference to MAF and MATT below the #Genuine Instant Runoff section
(rough draft of something I may work up into a real proposal) |
(Moved reference to MAF and MATT below the #Genuine Instant Runoff section) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 1:
This is the page where [[User:RobLa]] keeps track of various ideas (his ideas and others' ideas) regarding putting all candidates into a playoff bracket, and then seeing how they fare head-to-head. It's arguable that [[Llull]] was the first person to think of this, but pairwise voting has been around for a while.
(User:RobLa 2018-12-01) - Working version of a proposal I'm about to make on the [[election-methods mailing list]].▼
There are many people who are not "good at math" who pay attention to [[W:March Madness|March Madness]] and/or the [[W:Wimbledon championship|Wimbledon championship]] and/or any number of other [[W:Single-elimination tournament|single-elimination tournaments]]. There's often a debate about whether the seeding of the tournaments is fair, It seems to [[User:RobLa]] that seeding the tournament such that all members of the [[Smith set]] are guaranteed to advance to the final rounds, and that it seems likely that some variation of [[Copeland's method]] could be used for seeding.
It would seem as though [[Ranked Robin]] is an interesting variant on the idea.
==Genuine Instant Runoff==
This is a proposal that [[User:RobLa]] devised in 2018:
#Create a playoff bracket with room for all candidates
#*1a..... using rules similar to the ones the NCAA uses for March Madness:
#**https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_Madness
#* 1b. ....or maybe on the ones Wimbledon uses:
#**https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wimbledon_championship
#*1c. In short, use a single-elimination tournament:
#**https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-elimination_tournament
#Seed the candidates in the tournament such that all members of the Smith set are guaranteed to advance to the final rounds. I'm guessing that the Copeland score could be used:
#*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copeland_method
# Calculate the winner of each contest using the standard ways of inferring pairwise matchup results based on ranked/rated ballots
These steps may seem like a lot of theatrical extras (especially in contests where there is a single Condorcet winner) but I think this framework could provide a useful mental model for people whose eyes glaze over when try to describe some of the mathematical vulnerabilities of systems like Instant Runoff.
== MAF and MATT==
{{see also|MAF|MATT}}
In keeping with the "runoff" name, here's a couple of new voting systems I worked on in late 2018 as possible alternatives to California's [[W:Jungle primary|jungle primary]]:
*[[Majority approval filter]] ([[MAF]])
*[[Maximum approval top-two]] ([[MATT]])
==Changelog==
===2022===
====2022-08-26====
:''updated: 01:47, 27 August 2022 (UTC)''
Another reddit discussion ("[https://www.reddit.com/r/RanktheVote/comments/wxyyj8/condorcet_bracket_for_singlewinner_elections/ /r/EndFPTP: Condorcet Bracket (for single-winner elections)]") inspired me to update this page.
====2022-03-15====
:''updated: 02:13, 16 March 2022 (UTC)''
There was a discussion on reddit the other day titled "[https://www.reddit.com/r/EndFPTP/comments/teact4/alright_new_system_championship_voting/ /r/EndFPTP: Alright, new system: Championship Voting]". Of course, there's nothing new under the sun. It could be that [[Condorcet]] ripped off [[Llull]], but my hunch is that Condorcet just independently invented the same system that Llull created. Regardless, I'm going to keep writing this up (especially because of rumors I've heard about "[[Ranked Robin]]").
===2021===
====2021-02-03====
I didn't make the proposal to the [[EM-list]]. Oh well. Many other things came up in my life. -- [[User:RobLa|RobLa]] ([[User talk:RobLa|talk]]) 22:32, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
===2018===
====2018-12-02====
:''Below is a comment from December 2018 -- [[User:RobLa|RobLa]] ([[User talk:RobLa|talk]]) 22:32, 3 February 2021 (UTC)''
Comment from 04:46, 2 December 2018 :
<blockquote>
▲
1. Create a playoff bracket with room for all candidates, using rules similar to the ones the NCAA uses for March Madness:
Line 7 ⟶ 60:
....or maybe on the ones Wimbledon uses:
In short, use a single-elimination tournament:
2. Seed the candidates in the tournament such that all members of the Smith set are guaranteed to advance to the final rounds. I'm guessing that the Copeland score could be used:
3. Calculate the winner of each contest using the standard ways of inferring pairwise matchup results based on ranked/rated ballots
These steps may seem like a lot of theatrical extras (especially in contests where there is a single Condorcet winner) but I think this framework could provide a useful mental model for people whose eyes glaze over when try to describe some of the mathematical vulnerabilities of systems like Instant Runoff.
</blockquote>
(UPDATE: it's possible to see the note above in the version history for this page, and here: https://electowiki.org/w/index.php?title=User:RobLa/runoff&oldid=5182 )
| |||