Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
Citation bot (talk | contribs) Altered journal. | Use this bot. Report bugs. | Suggested by Superegz | Category:Electoral system criteria | #UCB_Category 23/32 |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Short description|Electoral system criterion}}
{{Refimprove|article|date=August 2019}}
'''Independence of Smith-dominated alternatives''' ('''ISDA''', also known as '''Smith-[[Independence of irrelevant alternatives|IIA]]''') is a [[voting system criterion]] which says that the winner of an election should not be affected by candidates who are not in the [[Smith set]].<ref name="Green 2001 four">{{
Say we classify all candidates in an election into two categories, ''Frontrunners'' and ''non-Frontrunners'', where every candidate in the group of ''Frontrunners'' defeats every candidate in the group of ''non-Frontrunners.'' Then, independence of Smith-dominated alternatives says it is always possible to eliminate all candidates in the group of ''non-Frontrunners'' without changing the outcome of the election.
Line 11:
== Ambiguity ==
Smith-[[Independence of irrelevant alternatives|IIA]] can sometimes be taken to mean independence of non-Smith ''irrelevant'' alternatives, i.e. that no ''losing'' candidate outside the Smith set can affect the result.{{cn|date=March 2024}} This differs slightly from the above definition, in that methods passing [[independence of irrelevant alternatives]] (but not the [[Smith criterion]]) also satisfy this definition of Smith-IIA.
If the criterion is taken to mean independence of non-Smith alternatives, regardless of whether they are relevant (i.e. winners) or not, Smith-independence requires passing the [[Smith criterion]].
| |||