Arthur Wist

2018-01-29 13:43:27 UTC

Hello,

Sorry in advanced for the huge load of information all at once, but I think

you'll highly likely find the following quite interesting:

On how people misunderstood the Duggan-Schwartz theorem:

https://arxiv.org/abs/1611.07105 - Two statements of the Duggan-Schwartz

theorem

https://arxiv.org/abs/1611.07102 - Manipulability of consular election

rules

EVERYTHING here:

https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ssb0yjUAAAAJ&sortby=pubdate

Some key highlights from that last link above:

https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.07580 - Achieving Proportional Representation

via Voting [ On which a blog post exists:

https://medium.com/@haris.aziz/achieving-proportional-representation-2d741871e78.

Better than STV and STV derivatives in all criteria? You decide! ]

http://materials.dagstuhl.de/files/17/17261/17261.HarisAziz.Slides.pdf -

Proportional Representation in Approval-based Voting and Beyond. [This is a

presentation - and it's outdated by now, albeit it's only from Summer last

year.]

https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.10415 - A polynomial-time algorithm to achieve

extended justified representation

https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.06030 - Sub-committee Approval Voting and

Generalised Justified Representation Axiom [This generalizes large parts of

the mathematics of voting theory!]

And on the topic of committees, not quite from election science, but

relevant nonetheless:

https://arxiv.org/abs/0804.2202 - To how many politicians should

government be left? [With a p-value of =<10^-6. And no, that's NOT a typo.]

https://arxiv.org/abs/0808.1684 - Parkinson's Law Quantified: Three

Investigations on Bureaucratic Inefficiency

The above two papers got a bit of news & blog coverage back in the day:

http://old.themoscowtimes.com/article/business-in-brief/article/austrians-suggest-small-is-better/article/austrians-suggest-small-is-better/362667.html

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2008/apr/27/physicists-quantify-the-coefficient-of-inefficiency

https://www.nature.com/news/2008/080822/full/news.2008.1050.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/4221839/Eight-people-on-committee-leads-to-decision-deadlock-scientists-say.html

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/numbers-up-for-unlucky-eight-nnt5js8jdvm

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126902.200-editorial-parkinsons-law-is-alive-and-well/

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126901.300-explaining-the-curse-of-work/?full=true

Kind regards,

Sorry in advanced for the huge load of information all at once, but I think

you'll highly likely find the following quite interesting:

On how people misunderstood the Duggan-Schwartz theorem:

https://arxiv.org/abs/1611.07105 - Two statements of the Duggan-Schwartz

theorem

https://arxiv.org/abs/1611.07102 - Manipulability of consular election

rules

EVERYTHING here:

https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ssb0yjUAAAAJ&sortby=pubdate

Some key highlights from that last link above:

https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.07580 - Achieving Proportional Representation

via Voting [ On which a blog post exists:

https://medium.com/@haris.aziz/achieving-proportional-representation-2d741871e78.

Better than STV and STV derivatives in all criteria? You decide! ]

http://materials.dagstuhl.de/files/17/17261/17261.HarisAziz.Slides.pdf -

Proportional Representation in Approval-based Voting and Beyond. [This is a

presentation - and it's outdated by now, albeit it's only from Summer last

year.]

https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.10415 - A polynomial-time algorithm to achieve

extended justified representation

https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.06030 - Sub-committee Approval Voting and

Generalised Justified Representation Axiom [This generalizes large parts of

the mathematics of voting theory!]

And on the topic of committees, not quite from election science, but

relevant nonetheless:

https://arxiv.org/abs/0804.2202 - To how many politicians should

government be left? [With a p-value of =<10^-6. And no, that's NOT a typo.]

https://arxiv.org/abs/0808.1684 - Parkinson's Law Quantified: Three

Investigations on Bureaucratic Inefficiency

The above two papers got a bit of news & blog coverage back in the day:

http://old.themoscowtimes.com/article/business-in-brief/article/austrians-suggest-small-is-better/article/austrians-suggest-small-is-better/362667.html

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2008/apr/27/physicists-quantify-the-coefficient-of-inefficiency

https://www.nature.com/news/2008/080822/full/news.2008.1050.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/4221839/Eight-people-on-committee-leads-to-decision-deadlock-scientists-say.html

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/numbers-up-for-unlucky-eight-nnt5js8jdvm

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126902.200-editorial-parkinsons-law-is-alive-and-well/

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126901.300-explaining-the-curse-of-work/?full=true

Kind regards,