Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Social Choice and Welfare 2/2022

27.07.2021 | Original Paper

Weighted scoring elections: is Borda best?

verfasst von: D. Marc Kilgour, Jean-Charles Grégoire, Angèle M. Foley

Erschienen in: Social Choice and Welfare | Ausgabe 2/2022

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Weighted scoring rules, perhaps the most common procedures for multi-candidate, single-winner elections, are defined by score vectors, of which the Borda Count is the best known example. The concept of Borda dominance identifies candidates who cannot win under any score vector; we assess its usefulness in the context of single-winner elections. We propose several families of score vectors that can accommodate any number of candidates, asking whether any of them can improve on Borda Count. Using large-scale simulation, we compare score vectors on Condorcet efficiency, or ability to find a Condorcet winner when one exists, on resilience to ballot truncation, and on ability to maximize the Copeland score using both complete and uniformly truncated ballots. Borda performs well on criteria related to Condorcet winner and Copeland score but, depending on the preference model, may not be optimal. Convex score vectors are the most resilient to ballot truncation.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Ayadi M, Ben Amor N, Lang J, Peters D (2019) Single transferable vote: Incomplete knowledge and communication issues. In: AAMAS 19: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems, International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, pp 1288–1296 Ayadi M, Ben Amor N, Lang J, Peters D (2019) Single transferable vote: Incomplete knowledge and communication issues. In: AAMAS 19: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems, International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, pp 1288–1296
Zurück zum Zitat Benoit J-P (1992) Scoring reversals: a major league dilemma. Soc Choice Welf 9:89–97CrossRef Benoit J-P (1992) Scoring reversals: a major league dilemma. Soc Choice Welf 9:89–97CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Bentert M, Skowron P (2019) comparing election methods where each voter ranks only few candidates. arXiv:1901.10848, 30 January 2019 Bentert M, Skowron P (2019) comparing election methods where each voter ranks only few candidates. arXiv:​1901.​10848, 30 January 2019
Zurück zum Zitat Black D (1958) Theory of committees and elections. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Black D (1958) Theory of committees and elections. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Zurück zum Zitat Brams SJ (1982) The AMS nominating system is vulnerable to truncation of preferences. Not AMS 29:136–138 Brams SJ (1982) The AMS nominating system is vulnerable to truncation of preferences. Not AMS 29:136–138
Zurück zum Zitat Cervone DP, Gehrlein WV, Zwicker WS (2005) Which scoring rule maximizes Condorcet efficiency under IAC? Theory Decis 58(2):145–185CrossRef Cervone DP, Gehrlein WV, Zwicker WS (2005) Which scoring rule maximizes Condorcet efficiency under IAC? Theory Decis 58(2):145–185CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Cullinan J, Hsiao SK, Polett D (2014) A Borda count for partially ordered ballots. Soc Choice Welf 42:913–926CrossRef Cullinan J, Hsiao SK, Polett D (2014) A Borda count for partially ordered ballots. Soc Choice Welf 42:913–926CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Dogan O, Giritligil AE (2014) Implementing the Borda outcome via truncated scoring rules: a computational study. Public Choice 159:83–98CrossRef Dogan O, Giritligil AE (2014) Implementing the Borda outcome via truncated scoring rules: a computational study. Public Choice 159:83–98CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Emerson P (2013) The original Borda count and partial voting. Soc Choice Welf 40:353–358CrossRef Emerson P (2013) The original Borda count and partial voting. Soc Choice Welf 40:353–358CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Filmus Y, Oren J (2014) Efficient voting via the top-\(k\) elicitation scheme: a probabilistic approach. In: EC 14: Proceedings of the Fifteenth ACM Conference on economics and computation, ACM, pp 295–312 Filmus Y, Oren J (2014) Efficient voting via the top-\(k\) elicitation scheme: a probabilistic approach. In: EC 14: Proceedings of the Fifteenth ACM Conference on economics and computation, ACM, pp 295–312
Zurück zum Zitat Fishburn PC (1981) Inverted orders for monotone scoring rules. Discrete Appl Math 3:27–36CrossRef Fishburn PC (1981) Inverted orders for monotone scoring rules. Discrete Appl Math 3:27–36CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Fishburn PC (1964) Decision and value theory. Wiley, New York Fishburn PC (1964) Decision and value theory. Wiley, New York
Zurück zum Zitat Fishburn PC (1974) Paradoxes of voting. Am Polit Sci Rev 68:537–546CrossRef Fishburn PC (1974) Paradoxes of voting. Am Polit Sci Rev 68:537–546CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Fishburn PC, Gehrlein W (1978) Condorcet paradox and anonymous preference profiles. Public Choice 26:1–18 Fishburn PC, Gehrlein W (1978) Condorcet paradox and anonymous preference profiles. Public Choice 26:1–18
Zurück zum Zitat Fishburn PC, Brams SJ (1983) Paradoxes of preferential voting. Math Mag 56:207–214CrossRef Fishburn PC, Brams SJ (1983) Paradoxes of preferential voting. Math Mag 56:207–214CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Fraenkel J, Grofman B (2014) The Borda count and its real world alternatives: comparing scoring rules in Nauru and Slovenia. Aust J Polit Sci 49:186–205CrossRef Fraenkel J, Grofman B (2014) The Borda count and its real world alternatives: comparing scoring rules in Nauru and Slovenia. Aust J Polit Sci 49:186–205CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Gehrlein WV (2003) Coincidence probabilities for simple majority and positional voting rules. In: Sertel MR, Koray S (eds) Advances in economic design. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, pp 53–63CrossRef Gehrlein WV (2003) Coincidence probabilities for simple majority and positional voting rules. In: Sertel MR, Koray S (eds) Advances in economic design. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, pp 53–63CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Gehrlein WV, Fishburn PC (1978) Coincidence probabilities for simple majority and positional voting rules. Soc Sci Res 7:272–283CrossRef Gehrlein WV, Fishburn PC (1978) Coincidence probabilities for simple majority and positional voting rules. Soc Sci Res 7:272–283CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Gilbaud GT (1952) Les théories de l’intérêt général et le problème logique de l’agréation. Écon Appl 5:501–584 Gilbaud GT (1952) Les théories de l’intérêt général et le problème logique de l’agréation. Écon Appl 5:501–584
Zurück zum Zitat Kalech M, Kraus S, Kaminka GA, Goldman CV (2011) Practical voting rules with partial information. Auton Agents Multi-Agent Syst 22:151–182CrossRef Kalech M, Kraus S, Kaminka GA, Goldman CV (2011) Practical voting rules with partial information. Auton Agents Multi-Agent Syst 22:151–182CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Kamiya H, Orlik P, Takemura A, Terao H (2006) Arrangements and ranking patterns. Ann Combin 10:219–235CrossRef Kamiya H, Orlik P, Takemura A, Terao H (2006) Arrangements and ranking patterns. Ann Combin 10:219–235CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Kamwa E (2021) To what extent does the model of processing sincere incomplete rankings affect the likelihood of the truncation paradox? hal-02879390v2, Université des Antilles Kamwa E (2021) To what extent does the model of processing sincere incomplete rankings affect the likelihood of the truncation paradox? hal-02879390v2, Université des Antilles
Zurück zum Zitat Kilgour DM, Grégoire J-Ch, Foley AM (2020) The prevalence and consequences of ballot truncation in ranked-choice elections. Public Choice 184(1):197–218CrossRef Kilgour DM, Grégoire J-Ch, Foley AM (2020) The prevalence and consequences of ballot truncation in ranked-choice elections. Public Choice 184(1):197–218CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Lackner M (2014) Incomplete preferences in single-peaked electorates. In: AAAI-14, Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth AAAI Conference on artificial intelligence, pp 742–748 Lackner M (2014) Incomplete preferences in single-peaked electorates. In: AAAI-14, Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth AAAI Conference on artificial intelligence, pp 742–748
Zurück zum Zitat Lepelley D (1993) On the probability of electing the Condorcet loser. Math Soc Sci 25(2):105–116CrossRef Lepelley D (1993) On the probability of electing the Condorcet loser. Math Soc Sci 25(2):105–116CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Llamazares B, Peña T (2015a) Positional voting systems generated by cumulative standings functions. Group Decis Negot 24:777–801CrossRef Llamazares B, Peña T (2015a) Positional voting systems generated by cumulative standings functions. Group Decis Negot 24:777–801CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Llamazares B, Peña T (2015b) Scoring rules and social choice properties: some characterizations. Theory Decis 78:429–450CrossRef Llamazares B, Peña T (2015b) Scoring rules and social choice properties: some characterizations. Theory Decis 78:429–450CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Marchant T (2001) The probability of ties with scoring methods: Some results. Soc Choice Welf 18:709–735CrossRef Marchant T (2001) The probability of ties with scoring methods: Some results. Soc Choice Welf 18:709–735CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Margolis H (1977) Probability of a tie election. Public Choice 31:135–138CrossRef Margolis H (1977) Probability of a tie election. Public Choice 31:135–138CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat McIntee TJ, Saari DG (2017) Likelihood of voting outcomes with generalized IAC probabilities. Math Soc Sci 87:1–10CrossRef McIntee TJ, Saari DG (2017) Likelihood of voting outcomes with generalized IAC probabilities. Math Soc Sci 87:1–10CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Merlin V, Tataru M, Valognes F (2000) On the probability that all decision rules select the same winner. J Math Econ 33:183–207CrossRef Merlin V, Tataru M, Valognes F (2000) On the probability that all decision rules select the same winner. J Math Econ 33:183–207CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Meyers A, Orrison ME, Townsend J, Wolff S, Wu A (2014) Generalized Condorcet winners. Soc Choice Welf 43:11–27CrossRef Meyers A, Orrison ME, Townsend J, Wolff S, Wu A (2014) Generalized Condorcet winners. Soc Choice Welf 43:11–27CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Montes I, Rademalker M, Pérez-Fernández R, De Baets B (2020) A correspondence between voting procedures and stochastic orderings. Eur J Oper Res 285:977–987CrossRef Montes I, Rademalker M, Pérez-Fernández R, De Baets B (2020) A correspondence between voting procedures and stochastic orderings. Eur J Oper Res 285:977–987CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Nurmi H, Salonen H (2008) More Borda count variations of project assessment. AUCO Czech Econ Rev 2:109–122 Nurmi H, Salonen H (2008) More Borda count variations of project assessment. AUCO Czech Econ Rev 2:109–122
Zurück zum Zitat Oren J, Flimus Y, Boutilier C (2013) Efficient vote elicitation under candidate uncertainty. In: IJCAI-13: Proceedings of the Twenty-Third International Joint Conference on artificial intelligence, AAAI Press, pp 309–316 Oren J, Flimus Y, Boutilier C (2013) Efficient vote elicitation under candidate uncertainty. In: IJCAI-13: Proceedings of the Twenty-Third International Joint Conference on artificial intelligence, AAAI Press, pp 309–316
Zurück zum Zitat Pérez-Fernández R, De Baets B (2019) The superdominance relation, the positional winner, and more missing links between Borda and Condorcet. J Theoret Polit 31:46–65CrossRef Pérez-Fernández R, De Baets B (2019) The superdominance relation, the positional winner, and more missing links between Borda and Condorcet. J Theoret Polit 31:46–65CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Reilly B (2002) Social choice in the South Seas: electoral innovation and the Borda count in the Pacific Island countries. Int Polit Sci Rev 23:355–372CrossRef Reilly B (2002) Social choice in the South Seas: electoral innovation and the Borda count in the Pacific Island countries. Int Polit Sci Rev 23:355–372CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Saari DG (1984) The ultimate of chaos resulting from weighted voting systems. Adv Appl Math 5:286–308CrossRef Saari DG (1984) The ultimate of chaos resulting from weighted voting systems. Adv Appl Math 5:286–308CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Saari DG (1992) Millions of election outcomes from a single profile. Soc Choice Welf 9:277–306 Saari DG (1992) Millions of election outcomes from a single profile. Soc Choice Welf 9:277–306
Zurück zum Zitat Saari DG (1999) Explaining all three-alternative voting outcomes. J Econ Theory 87(2):313–355CrossRef Saari DG (1999) Explaining all three-alternative voting outcomes. J Econ Theory 87(2):313–355CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Saari DG (2000) Mathematical structure of voting paradoxes. Econ Theory 15:1–53CrossRef Saari DG (2000) Mathematical structure of voting paradoxes. Econ Theory 15:1–53CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Saari DG, McIntee TJ (2013) Connecting pairwise and positional election outcomes. Math Soc Choice 66:140–151 Saari DG, McIntee TJ (2013) Connecting pairwise and positional election outcomes. Math Soc Choice 66:140–151
Zurück zum Zitat Stein WE, Mizzi PJ, Pfaffenberger RC (1994) A stochastic dominance analysis of ranked voting systems with scoring. Eur J Oper Res 74:78–85CrossRef Stein WE, Mizzi PJ, Pfaffenberger RC (1994) A stochastic dominance analysis of ranked voting systems with scoring. Eur J Oper Res 74:78–85CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Van Newenhizen J (1992) The Borda method is most likely to respect the Condorcet principle. Econ Theory 2(1):69–83CrossRef Van Newenhizen J (1992) The Borda method is most likely to respect the Condorcet principle. Econ Theory 2(1):69–83CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Weighted scoring elections: is Borda best?
verfasst von
D. Marc Kilgour
Jean-Charles Grégoire
Angèle M. Foley
Publikationsdatum
27.07.2021
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Social Choice and Welfare / Ausgabe 2/2022
Print ISSN: 0176-1714
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-217X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-021-01347-6

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2022

Social Choice and Welfare 2/2022 Zur Ausgabe