At 1:14 AM -0600 6/6/06, Jan Kok wrote:
Loops and backward jumps would not be allowed in the user-supplied
instructions.
My guess is that most voting methods can be described with the above
program template, and some very simple operations such as add a
constant, get the nth element of an array,
Jan-I imagine something like this:If (condition A1 and condition A2 and...) OR (condition A3 and condition A4 and...) OR ()...Then elect A Else If (condition B1 and conditionB2 and...) or (condition B3 and condition B4 and...) or ()...Then elect BAnd so forth. That's how ordinary
Kevin-I have looked at one or two of Woodall's papers. Do you havea reference for that "continuous" criterion? It's not quite what I'm looking for, but it's close.Thanks.AlexKevin Venzkewrote:Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 18:23:17 +0200 (CEST)From: Kevin Venzke <[EMAIL
This discussion sounds like what I encountered in Computer Science under
the topics of computability and computational complexity.
I think we can safely say that a good election method is an algorithm that
executes in bounded time. An election method should not be an exercise in
solving the
Dear Brian!
You wrote:
The Gini Welfare function recently
discussed here is O(n^2) with the number of voters.
No, it's not. It's only O(n*log(n)): Sort the n individual values
x_1,...,x_n to get x(1)x(2)...x(n), then compute the sum of
(2*i-1)*x(i) for i from 1 to n.
Jobst
I'm still working ona paper that I alluded to in a post to the list a few weeks ago. In my work, I imposed a condition on election methods that is innocuous for public elections but mathematically somewhat arbitrary: I assumed that the ballot counting rules can be specified with a finite number of
