User talk:Kristomun: Difference between revisions
→Voting theorists Page
No edit summary |
|||
Line 49:
[[User:Kristomun|Kristofer]], I would support your inclusion on the [[Voting theorists]] page if you would flesh out your user page with your contributions to make them clear. I know much of it has been simulations which may not really count but there is one part you mention I am super interested in. You mention the tradeoff between representativity and utilitarian efficiency of multiwinner methods. Can you make an electowiki page detailing the results? Is it possible to add some of the more modern systems to that analysis like [[Sequentially Spent Score | SSS]], [[Sequential Monroe voting | SMV]] and [[Allocated Score]]? --[[User:Dr. Edmonds|Dr. Edmonds]] ([[User talk:Dr. Edmonds|talk]]) 16:56, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
🙏
: To not toot my own horn too much, I've asked someone else what he thinks are my most important contributions. I haven't yet heard back from him and so I sort of forgot about this. But I would say (in no particular order): the proof that reversal symmetry, Condorcet, and DMTBR are incompatible; the exact minimum manipulability calculations for ranked voting with few voters and three or four candidates; and my "manual DSV" posts about the limits of methods that seek to circumvent Gibbard-Satterthwaite by failing universal domain. I don't think any of these are on the scale of, say, Green-Armytage's contributions, though.
: Regarding your question, it would take a pretty deep refactoring of my code, because it's based around ranked voting data structures. There's no theoretical barrier to applying the tradeoff calculations to cardinal methods, but in practice a lot of coding would have to be done to make it work. Making a page on the results should be relatively easy; I'll try to remember to do that :-) I could also add those other results to electowiki (e.g. the strategy results or the rev. sym. proof). [[User:Kristomun|Kristomun]] ([[User talk:Kristomun|talk]]) 20:58, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
| |||