|
Condorcet Winner Criterion
An electoral system satisfies the Condorcet winner criterion () if it always chooses the Condorcet winner when one exists. The candidate who wins a majority of the vote in every head-to-head election against each of the other candidatesthat is, a candidate preferred by more voters than any othersis the Condorcet winner, although Condorcet winners do not exist in all cases. It is sometimes simply referred to as the "Condorcet criterion", though it is very different from the "Condorcet loser criterion". Any voting method conforming to the Condorcet winner criterion is known as a Condorcet method. The Condorcet winner is the person who would win a two-candidate election against each of the other candidates in a plurality vote. For a set of candidates, the Condorcet winner is always the same regardless of the voting system in question, and can be discovered by using pairwise counting on voters' ranked preferences. A Condorcet winner will not always exist in a given set of votes, which ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Electoral System
An electoral system or voting system is a set of rules that determine how elections and Referendum, referendums are conducted and how their results are determined. Electoral systems are used in politics to elect governments, while non-political elections may take place in business, Nonprofit organization, non-profit organisations and informal organisations. These rules govern all aspects of the voting process: when elections occur, suffrage, who is allowed to vote, who can stand as a candidate, voting method, how ballots are marked and cast, how the ballots are counted, how votes translate into the election outcome, limits on campaign finance, campaign spending, and other factors that can affect the result. Political electoral systems are defined by constitutions and electoral laws, are typically conducted by election commissions, and can use multiple types of elections for different offices. Some electoral systems elect a single winner to a unique position, such as prime ministe ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Consistency Criterion
A voting system is consistent if, whenever the electorate is divided (arbitrarily) into several parts and elections in those parts garner the same result, then an election of the entire electorate also garners that result. Smith calls this property separability and Woodall calls it convexity. It has been proven a ranked voting system is "consistent if and only if it is a scoring function", i.e. a positional voting system. Borda count is an example of this. The failure of the consistency criterion can be seen as an example of Simpson's paradox Simpson's paradox is a phenomenon in probability and statistics in which a trend appears in several groups of data but disappears or reverses when the groups are combined. This result is often encountered in social-science and medical-science st .... As shown below under Kemeny-Young, passing or failing the consistency criterion can depend on whether the election selects a single winner or a full ranking of the candidates (sometimes refe ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Bucklin Voting
Bucklin voting is a class of voting methods that can be used for single-member and multi-member districts. As in highest median rules like the majority judgment, the Bucklin winner will be one of the candidates with the highest median ranking or rating. It is named after its original promoter, the Georgist politician James W. Bucklin of Grand Junction, Colorado, and is also known as the Grand Junction system. Voting process Bucklin rules varied, but here is a typical example: Voters are allowed rank preference ballots (first, second, third, etc.). First choice votes are first counted. If one candidate has a majority, that candidate wins. Otherwise the second choices are added to the first choices. Again, if a candidate with a majority vote is found, the winner is the candidate with the most votes accumulated. Lower rankings are added as needed. A majority is determined based on the number of valid ballots. Since, after the first round, there may be more votes cast than vo ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Borda Count
The Borda count is a family of positional voting rules which gives each candidate, for each ballot, a number of points corresponding to the number of candidates ranked lower. In the original variant, the lowest-ranked candidate gets 0 points, the next-lowest gets 1 point, etc., and the highest-ranked candidate gets ''n'' − 1 points, where ''n'' is the number of candidates. Once all votes have been counted, the option or candidate with the most points is the winner. The Borda count is intended to elect broadly acceptable options or candidates, rather than those preferred by a majority, and so is often described as a consensus-based voting system rather than a majoritarian one. The Borda count was developed independently several times, being first proposed in 1435 by Nicholas of Cusa (see History below), but is named for the 18th-century French mathematician and naval engineer Jean-Charles de Borda, who devised the system in 1770. It is currently used to elect two ethnic minority ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
CPO-STV
CPO-STV, or the Comparison of Pairs of Outcomes by the Single Transferable Vote, is a ranked voting system designed to achieve proportional representation. It is a more sophisticated variant of the Single Transferable Vote (STV) system, designed to overcome some of that system's perceived shortcomings. It does this by incorporating some of the features of Condorcet's method, a voting system designed for single-winner elections, into STV. As in other forms of STV, in a CPO-STV election more than one candidate is elected and voters must rank candidates in order of preference. As of February 2021, it has not been used for a public election. CPO-STV aims to overcome the problems of tactical voting in traditional forms of STV, where a candidate can be eliminated at an early stage in the process that might have gone on to be elected later had they been allowed to remain in the contest. CPO-STV works by an exhaustive comparison of the various possible outcomes of an election, in accorda ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Schulze Method
The Schulze method () is an electoral system developed in 1997 by Markus Schulze that selects a single winner using votes that express preferences. The method can also be used to create a sorted list of winners. The Schulze method is also known as Schwartz Sequential dropping (SSD), cloneproof Schwartz sequential dropping (CSSD), the beatpath method, beatpath winner, path voting, and path winner. The Schulze method is a Condorcet method, which means that if there is a candidate who is preferred by a majority over every other candidate in pairwise comparisons, then this candidate will be the winner when the Schulze method is applied. The output of the Schulze method gives an ordering of candidates. Therefore, if several positions are available, the method can be used for this purpose without modification, by letting the ''k'' top-ranked candidates win the ''k'' available seats. Furthermore, for proportional representation elections, a single transferable vote (STV) variant known as ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Ranked Pairs
Ranked pairs (sometimes abbreviated "RP") or the Tideman method is an electoral system developed in 1987 by Nicolaus Tideman that selects a single winner using votes that express preferences. The ranked-pairs procedure can also be used to create a sorted list of winners. If there is a candidate who is preferred over the other candidates, when compared in turn with each of the others, the ranked-pairs procedure guarantees that candidate will win. Because of this property, the ranked-pairs procedure complies with the Condorcet winner criterion (and is a Condorcet method). Procedure The ranked-pairs procedure operates as follows: # Tally the vote count comparing each pair of candidates, and determine the winner of each pair (provided there is not a tie) # Sort (rank) each pair, by strength of victory, from largest first to smallest last.In fact, there are different ways how the ''strength of a victory'' is measured. This article uses Tideman's original method based on margins of ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Nanson's Method
The Borda count electoral system can be combined with an instant-runoff procedure to create hybrid election methods that are called Nanson method and Baldwin method (also called Total Vote Runoff or TVR). Both methods are designed to satisfy the Condorcet criterion, and allow for incomplete ballots and equal rankings. Nanson method The Nanson method is based on the original work of the mathematician Edward J. Nanson in 1882. Nanson's method eliminates those choices from a Borda count tally that are at or below the average Borda count score, then the ballots are retallied as if the remaining candidates were exclusively on the ballot. This process is repeated if necessary until a single winner remains. If a Condorcet winner exists, they will be elected. If not, (there is a Condorcet cycle) then the preference with the smallest majority will be eliminated. Nanson's method can be adapted to handle incomplete ballots (including " plumping") and equal rankings ("bracketing"), tho ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Minimax Condorcet
In voting systems, the Minimax Condorcet method (often referred to as "the Minimax method") is one of several Condorcet methods used for tabulating votes and determining a winner when using ranked voting in a single-winner election. It is sometimes referred to as the Simpson–Kramer method, and the successive reversal method. Minimax selects as the winner the candidate whose greatest pairwise defeat is smaller than the greatest pairwise defeat of any other candidate: or, put another way, "the only candidate whose support never drops below percent" in any pairwise contest. Description of the method The Minimax Condorcet method selects the candidate for whom the greatest pairwise score for another candidate against him or her is the least such score among all candidates. Formal definition Formally, let \operatorname(X,Y) denote the pairwise score for X against Y. Then the candidate, W selected by minimax (aka the winner) is given by: : W = \arg \min_X \left( \max_Y \operator ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Dodgson's Method
Dodgson's method is an electoral system proposed by the author, mathematician and logician Charles Dodgson, better known as Lewis Carroll. The method is to extend the Condorcet method by swapping candidates until a Condorcet winner is found. The winner is the candidate which requires the minimum number of swaps. Dodgson proposed this voting scheme in his 1876 work "A method of taking votes on more than two issues". Given an integer ''k'' and an election, it is NP-complete to determine whether a candidate can become a Condorcet winner with fewer than ''k'' swaps. Description In Dodgson's method, each voter submits an ordered list of all candidates according to their own preference (from best to worst). The winner is defined to be the candidate for whom we need to perform the minimum number of pairwise swaps in each ballot (added over all candidates) before they become a Condorcet winner. In particular, if there is already a Condorcet winner, they win the election. In short, we must ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Copeland's Method
Copeland's method is a ranked voting method based on a scoring system of pairwise "wins", "losses", and "ties". The method has a long history: * Ramon Llull described the system in 1299, so it is sometimes referred to as "Llull's method" * The Marquis de Condorcet described a similar system in the 1780s, so the method could be referred to as "Condorcet's method", but instead other systems were subsequently devised that choose the Condorcet winner. * Arthur Herbert Copeland described the system in the 1950s, so it has been frequently been called "Copeland's method". (unpublished). Each voter is asked to rank candidates in order of preference. A candidate A is said to have majority preference over another candidate B if more voters prefer A to B than prefer B to A; if the numbers are equal then there is a preference tie. The Copeland score for a candidate is the number of other candidates over whom they have a majority preference ''plus'' half the number of candidates with whom t ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
.png "Click for more on -> Borda Count")
