The Perl Toolchain Summit needs more sponsors. If your company depends on Perl, please support this very important event.
 / 
Vote-Count-1.06
River stage zero No dependents
1 ++
/ Vote::Count::Method::STAR

NAME

Vote::Count::Method::STAR

VERSION 1.06

SYNOPSIS

  use Vote::Count::Method::STAR;

  my $tennessee = Vote::Count::Method::STAR->new(
  BallotSet  => read_range_ballots('t/data/tennessee.range.json'), );
  my $winner = $tennessee->STAR() ;

  say $Election->logv();

Description

Implements the STAR method for resolving Range Ballots.

Method Common Name: STAR (Score Then Automatic Runoff)

Scores the Range Ballots, then holds a runoff between the two highest scored choices. The method is named for the acronym for Score Then Automatic Runoff.

Function Name: STAR

Conducts and Logs STAR. Returns the winner or 0 in the event of a tie.

Criteria

Simplicity

The Range Ballot is more complex for voters than the Ranked Choice Ballot. The scoring and runoff are both very simple.

Later Harm

There is significantly less Later Harm with STAR than with other Borda methods. By ranking the preferred choice with the maximum score, and alternate choices very low, the voter is minimizing the later harm impact of those later choices. With 10 choices in regular Borda, the second choice would recieve 90% of the first choice's score, by ranking later choices at the bottom of the scale the impact is much lower.

Condorcet Criteria

STAR only meets the Condorcet Loser Criteria. The runoff prevents a Condorcet Loser from winning.

STAR does not meet the Smith and Condorcet Winner Criteria.

More information is needed to know if in practice it performs better than IRV.

Consistency

STAR should meet Monotonacity. Adding a non-winning choice will have no impact on the outcome unless they can score high enough to reach and lose the runoff phase. Clone handling is dependent on the behavior of the clone group supporters, if they rank the clones far apart, the clone that attracts later support from non-clone supporters is likely to not reach the runoff.

More information is needed to know if Clone handling is good or poor in practice, and whether there is a significant consistency failure of some other type.

BUG TRACKER

https://github.com/brainbuz/Vote-Count/issues

AUTHOR

John Karr (BRAINBUZ) brainbuz@cpan.org

CONTRIBUTORS

Copyright 2019 by John Karr (BRAINBUZ) brainbuz@cpan.org.

LICENSE

This module is released under the GNU Public License Version 3. See license file for details. For more information on this license visit http://fsf.org.