IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/copoec/v34y2023i3d10.1007_s10602-022-09390-w.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The case for minimax-TD

Author

Listed:
  • Richard B. Darlington

    (Cornell University)

Abstract

In spatial-model computer simulations with artificial voters and candidates, the well-known minimax single-winner voting system far outperformed 10 other systems at picking the best winners. It essentially tied with two others (Schulze and ranked pairs), both of which are far more complex than minimax. Minimax’s other advantages include Condorcet consistency, simplicity, monotonicity, and ease of voting because it allows tied and missing ranks. It also makes insincere strategic voting schemes difficult and dangerous for the schemers. The new minimax-TD system modifies minimax in three ways, all of which make it pick better winners, according to simulation studies: (a) TD includes Smith/minimax, (b) TD uses one particular definition of a candidate’s “largest loss” in two-way elections, and (c) TD includes a multi-stage tie-breaker which breaks nearly all ties. TD avoids four of the worst anomalies afflicting classic minimax. Four other minimax anomalies can be ignored, leaving TD arguably free of anomalies.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard B. Darlington, 2023. "The case for minimax-TD," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 410-420, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:copoec:v:34:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s10602-022-09390-w
    DOI: 10.1007/s10602-022-09390-w
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10602-022-09390-w
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10602-022-09390-w?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James Green-Armytage & T. Tideman & Rafael Cosman, 2016. "Statistical evaluation of voting rules," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(1), pages 183-212, January.
    2. Dan S. Felsenthal, 2012. "Review of Paradoxes Afflicting Procedures for Electing a Single Candidate," Studies in Choice and Welfare, in: Dan S. Felsenthal & Moshé Machover (ed.), Electoral Systems, chapter 0, pages 19-91, Springer.
    3. Kramer, Gerald H., 1977. "A dynamical model of political equilibrium," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 310-334, December.
    4. Adam Graham-Squire & David McCune, 2022. "A Mathematical Analysis of the 2022 Alaska Special Election for US House," Papers 2209.04764, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2022.
    5. Smith, John H, 1973. "Aggregation of Preferences with Variable Electorate," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(6), pages 1027-1041, November.
    6. Paul B. Simpson, 1969. "On Defining Areas of Voter Choice: Professor Tullock on Stable Voting," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 83(3), pages 478-490.
    7. Dan S. Felsenthal & Hannu Nurmi, 2017. "Monotonicity Failures Afflicting Procedures for Electing a Single Candidate," SpringerBriefs in Economics, Springer, number 978-3-319-51061-3, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Markus Schulze, 2024. "Comment on "The case for minimax‑TD"," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 437-438, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kamwa, Eric, 2017. "On stable rules for selecting committees," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 36-44.
    2. Wesley H. Holliday & Eric Pacuit, 2020. "Split Cycle: A New Condorcet Consistent Voting Method Independent of Clones and Immune to Spoilers," Papers 2004.02350, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2023.
    3. Dan S. Felsenthal & Hannu Nurmi, 2018. "Monotonicity Violations by Borda’s Elimination and Nanson’s Rules: A Comparison," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 637-664, August.
    4. Aleksei Y. Kondratev & Alexander S. Nesterov, 2020. "Measuring majority power and veto power of voting rules," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 183(1), pages 187-210, April.
    5. Wesley H. Holliday & Eric Pacuit, 2021. "Measuring Violations of Positive Involvement in Voting," Papers 2106.11502, arXiv.org.
    6. Wesley H. Holliday & Eric Pacuit, 2021. "Axioms for defeat in democratic elections," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 33(4), pages 475-524, October.
    7. Dan S. Felsenthal & Hannu Nurmi, 2019. "The No-Show Paradox Under a Restricted Domain," Homo Oeconomicus: Journal of Behavioral and Institutional Economics, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 277-293, April.
    8. Dan Felsenthal & Nicolaus Tideman, 2014. "Weak Condorcet winner(s) revisited," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 160(3), pages 313-326, September.
    9. Holliday, Wesley H., 2024. "An impossibility theorem concerning positive involvement in voting," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 236(C).
    10. Dan S. Felsenthal & Hannu Nurmi, 2016. "Two types of participation failure under nine voting methods in variable electorates," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 168(1), pages 115-135, July.
    11. Martin, Mathieu & Merlin, Vincent, 2002. "The stability set as a social choice correspondence," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 91-113, September.
    12. Wesley H. Holliday & Chase Norman & Eric Pacuit & Saam Zahedian, 2022. "Impossibility theorems involving weakenings of expansion consistency and resoluteness in voting," Papers 2208.06907, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2023.
    13. Green-Armytage, James, 2011. "Strategic voting and nomination," MPRA Paper 32200, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Wesley H. Holliday & Eric Pacuit, 2020. "Axioms for Defeat in Democratic Elections," Papers 2008.08451, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2023.
    15. Wesley H. Holliday, 2024. "An impossibility theorem concerning positive involvement in voting," Papers 2401.05657, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2024.
    16. Wesley H. Holliday & Eric Pacuit, 2023. "Split Cycle: a new Condorcet-consistent voting method independent of clones and immune to spoilers," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 197(1), pages 1-62, October.
    17. Le Breton, Michel & Truchon, Michel, 1997. "A Borda measure for social choice functions," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 249-272, October.
    18. De Donder, Philippe & Le Breton, Michel & Truchon, Michel, 2000. "Choosing from a weighted tournament1," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 85-109, July.
    19. Harrison-Trainor, Matthew, 2022. "An analysis of random elections with large numbers of voters," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 68-84.
    20. James Green-Armytage, 2023. "A Dodgson-Hare synthesis," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 458-470, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Minimax; Voting systems; Condorcet; Spatial voting models; Voting anomalies;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:copoec:v:34:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s10602-022-09390-w. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.