I definitively like when physicists keep sticking to psephology...
Alex Small wrote:
I have, at long last, finished a manuscript on FBC.
https://sites.google.com/site/physicistatlarge/FBC09.pdf
In brief, I prove that methods satisfying Strong FBC can be grouped
into 4 categories. One encompasses point systems that give equal
points to first and second place. Another is closely related,
involving point systems and thresholds of support. Methods in the
third category are hard to construct, but if we relax my very strict
phrasing of SFBC to allow for cases where voters sometimes (but not
always) have incentives to rank 2 candidates in first place, you get
MDDA. The 4th category is shown to be "uninteresting" because the
methods make mathematical sense (they divide the space of all possible
electorates into non-overlapping and symmetric regions without
violating FBC) but no practical sense (you can't really interpret
these methods in terms of any simple, meaningful criteria).
In order to get feedback on this, I've started a blog where readers
can critique the manuscript in comment threads, and where I will also
be posting on other election-related matters as the mood strikes me.
http://votingmath.blogspot.com/
Anyway, I welcome comments. If critiques show that the results and
methods are valid, I hope to submit to a peer-reviewed journal.
Alex Small
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
