Difference between revisions of "Method evaluation poll"

From Electowiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Method evalutaion poll)
(remove question marks)
Line 41: Line 41:
 
     3      8
 
     3      8
 
  [[CDTT|CDTT,IRV]]
 
  [[CDTT|CDTT,IRV]]
     7       9.5
+
     7     9.5
  
 
==== Condorcet-efficient ====
 
==== Condorcet-efficient ====
Line 83: Line 83:
 
     JG  ??  ??  ??  ??
 
     JG  ??  ??  ??  ??
 
  [[range voting]] (ratings summation)
 
  [[range voting]] (ratings summation)
     6       ?
+
     6      
 
  [[median rating]]
 
  [[median rating]]
     3       ?
+
     3      
 
  [[ranked pairs]](cardinal pairwise)
 
  [[ranked pairs]](cardinal pairwise)
     10       ?
+
     10      
 
  [[beatpath]](cardinal pairwise)
 
  [[beatpath]](cardinal pairwise)
     10       ?
+
     10      
  
  
Line 96: Line 96:
 
     JG  ??  ??  ??  ??
 
     JG  ??  ??  ??  ??
 
  [[candidate withdrawal option|CWO]]-ER-IRV(whole)
 
  [[candidate withdrawal option|CWO]]-ER-IRV(whole)
     7       ?
+
     7      
 
  [[candidate withdrawal option|CWO]]-ER-IRV(fractional)
 
  [[candidate withdrawal option|CWO]]-ER-IRV(fractional)
     7       ?
+
     7      
 
  [[candidate withdrawal option|CWO]]-ranked pairs(WV)
 
  [[candidate withdrawal option|CWO]]-ranked pairs(WV)
     9       ?
+
     9      
 
  [[candidate withdrawal option|CWO]]-ranked ballot plurality
 
  [[candidate withdrawal option|CWO]]-ranked ballot plurality
     4       ?
+
     4      
 
  [[MMPO|minmax(pairwise opposition)]] with AERLO and ATLO
 
  [[MMPO|minmax(pairwise opposition)]] with AERLO and ATLO
     ?       ?
+
     ?      
 
  [[beatpath]](WV) with AERLO and ATLO
 
  [[beatpath]](WV) with AERLO and ATLO
     8      ?
+
     8       
 
  [[beatpath]](WV) with strong/weak preference option
 
  [[beatpath]](WV) with strong/weak preference option
 
     8
 
     8

Revision as of 15:10, 14 June 2005

Method evalutaion poll

Please rate the following single-winner methods on a scale from 0 to 10, on merit alone. That is, leaving the issue of public salability aside, how well will the method perform in a large, contentious electorate?

The answers you give on your first pass through the survey need not be final. Please feel free to change/update your answers as many times as you like.

Feel free to add new methods, especially interesting ones!

binary input

   JG       CB    ??   ??   ??
Plurality
    2       2
Two round runoff
    3       5
Approval
    5       6
Random Ballot
    1       1

ranking input

not Condorcet-efficient

   JG     CB   ??   ??   ??
Borda count
   1       4 
IRV without equal rankings
   4       7 
ER-IRV(whole)
   6       4   
ER-IRV(fractional)
   6       6
Bucklin
   3       6

nearly Condorcet-efficient

   JG      CB   ??   ??   ??
minmax(pairwise opposition)
    3       8
CDTT,IRV
    7      9.5

Condorcet-efficient

   JG      CB   ??   ??   ??
ranked pairs(WV)
    8       7 
ranked pairs(margins)
    2       4  
beatpath(WV)
    8       7 
beatpath(margins)
    2       4 
sequential dropping(WV)
    7       ? 
minmax(WV)
    3       ? 
minmax(margins)
    1       ? 
Smith//minmax(WV)
    7       ? 
Smith//minmax(margins)
    2       ? 
Nanson
    5       ? 
Raynaud
    5       ?

ranking input with approval cutoff

   JG      CB   ??   ??   ??
definite majority choice
    7       8.5 
approval weighted pairwise (e.g. with ranked pairs base)
    9       8 
approval margins
    4       9

rating input

   JG   ??   ??   ??   ??
range voting (ratings summation)
    6        
median rating
    3        
ranked pairs(cardinal pairwise)
   10        
beatpath(cardinal pairwise)
   10       


other

   JG   ??   ??   ??   ??
CWO-ER-IRV(whole)
    7        
CWO-ER-IRV(fractional)
    7        
CWO-ranked pairs(WV)
    9        
CWO-ranked ballot plurality
    4        
minmax(pairwise opposition) with AERLO and ATLO
    ?        
beatpath(WV) with AERLO and ATLO
    8       
beatpath(WV) with strong/weak preference option
    8

See also

Essential Questions poll