Showing 1–2 of 2 results for author: Darlington, R B

Are Condorcet and minimax voting systems the best?

Authors: Richard B. Darlington

Abstract: For decades the minimax voting system was well known to experts on voting systems but was not widely considered to be one of the best systems. But in recent years two important experts, Nicolaus Tideman and Andrew Myers, have both recognized minimax as one of the best systems. I agree with that. This paper presents my own reasons for preferring minimax. The paper explicitly discusses about 20 syst… ▽ More For decades the minimax voting system was well known to experts on voting systems but was not widely considered to be one of the best systems. But in recent years two important experts, Nicolaus Tideman and Andrew Myers, have both recognized minimax as one of the best systems. I agree with that. This paper presents my own reasons for preferring minimax. The paper explicitly discusses about 20 systems. △ Less

Submitted 9 May, 2022; v1 submitted 28 June, 2018; originally announced July 2018.

Comments: 38 pages, no figures. Some material was inadvertently omitted from v9, but was in v7 and v8. It appears here in Section 6.3

Minimax is the best electoral system after all

Authors: Richard B. Darlington

Abstract: When each voter rates or ranks several candidates for a single office, a strong Condorcet winner (SCW) is one who beats all others in two-way races. Among 21 electoral systems examined, 18 will sometimes make candidate X the winner even if thousands of voters would need to change their votes to make X a SCW while another candidate Y could become a SCW with only one such change. Analysis supports t… ▽ More When each voter rates or ranks several candidates for a single office, a strong Condorcet winner (SCW) is one who beats all others in two-way races. Among 21 electoral systems examined, 18 will sometimes make candidate X the winner even if thousands of voters would need to change their votes to make X a SCW while another candidate Y could become a SCW with only one such change. Analysis supports the intuitive conclusion that these 18 systems are unacceptable. The well-known minimax system survives this test. It fails 10 others, but there are good reasons to ignore all 10. Minimax-T adds a new tie-breaker. It surpasses competing systems on a combination of simplicity, transparency, voter privacy, input flexibility, resistance to strategic voting, and rarity of ties. It allows write-ins, machine counting except for write-ins, voters who don't rate or rank every candidate, and tied ratings or ranks. Eleven computer simulation studies used 6 different definitions (one at a time) of the best candidate, and found that minimax-T always soundly beat all other tested systems at picking that candidate. A new maximum-likelihood electoral system named CMO is the theoretically optimum system under reasonable conditions, but is too complex for use in real-world elections. In computer simulations, minimax and minimax-T nearly always pick the same winners as CMO. △ Less

Submitted 21 September, 2016; v1 submitted 14 June, 2016; originally announced June 2016.

Comments: 40 pages, no figures. Section 3 now recommends three tie-breaking methods, not just one. Elsewhere, many small changes were made to increase clarity or correct typos