[EM] Re: sprucing up

2005-02-15 Thread Forest Simmons
Dan, Thanks for your interest. "Sprucing Up" is still in a state of evolution. Originally it meant restricting to the Uncovered Set, then collapsing any "beat clones" that might remain, then (recursively) applying the method being spruced up to the collapsed clone sets until an actual candidate

[EM] Re: Sprucing up vs. Condorcet Lottery vs. immunity: The "twisted prism" example

2005-01-20 Thread Ted Stern
On 20 Jan 2005 at 14:54 PST, Ted Stern wrote: > So your defeat rankings should actually be > Bi>Ai , strength 11 (the 3 "straight upward" beats) > A1>A2>A3>A1 , strength 10 (the "upper clockwise" 3-cycle) > B1 Ai>Bj (i!=j), strength 8 (the 6 "diagonal downward

[EM] Re: Sprucing up vs. Condorcet Lottery vs. immunity: The "twisted prism" example

2005-01-20 Thread Ted Stern
On 6 Jan 2005 at 01:32 PST, Jobst Heitzig wrote: > Dear Forest! > > Your sprucing up technique is a very nice idea since it can simplify the > tallying of those methods which fulfil beat-clone-proofness and > uncoveredness. However, some of which you wrote has confused me > completely: Did I und

[EM] Re: Sprucing up vs. Condorcet Lottery vs. immunity: The "twisted prism" example

2005-01-06 Thread Jobst Heitzig
Sorry, the diagram didn't come out right, so here it is again: A1 10/| \ clockwise cycle / | \ A3--A2 | | | upward beats |9 | | (diagonal downward beats omitted) | B1 | | / \ | counter-clockwise cycle | /10 \| B3--B2 __

[EM] Re: Sprucing up MMPO and other methods

2004-12-28 Thread Ted Stern
On 28 Dec 2004 at 13:40 PST, Ted Stern wrote: > I think it is possible to show that every 4-candidate cycle can be reduced > to 3 candidates this way. Can you verify this? This would take care of all > RP/BP/River differences in the 4 candidate case. Five candidates might be > tougher, but you g

[EM] Re: Sprucing up MMPO and other methods

2004-12-28 Thread Ted Stern
Hi Forest, Summarizing: "sprucing up" is essentially a combination of short beatpath + clone reduction. Or am I missing something? I have a question about the first stage, eliminating covered candidates: On 21 Dec 2004 at 16:09 PST, Forest Simmons wrote: > 1. Eliminate covered candidates until

Re: [EM] Re: "sprucing up"

2004-12-22 Thread Kevin Venzke
Forest, I certainly think this is an impressive, interesting idea, even if I don't have a lot of comments on it. But: --- Forest Simmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit : > In particular, Spruced Up River, Spruced Up Ranked Pairs, Spruced Up Short > Ranked Pairs, Spruced Up MinMax, Spruced Up SSD,

[EM] Re: "sprucing up"

2004-12-22 Thread Forest Simmons
The most amazing and directly useful result in the "sprucing up" message below is that (for public elections) the only case we have to worry about is a cycle of three. If we can decide how to resolve cycles of three, the sprucing up process takes care of the rest. The sprucing up process only