Talk:Schulze STV
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 14 February 2024. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
NP-complete?
editIf I have this right, Schulze STV is effectively determining if a graph has a path no greater than the minimum traversal path, by way of needing to discover the minimum traversal path. The approach does reduce the number of direct pairwise computations necessary (unless you accidentally stumble upon the Condorcet outcome, CPO-STV must compute all of them), but it still does have to compute the same information by a different method (i.e. depending on the order in which you carry out the computations, it is possible you will not have enough information to determine the outcome until you have performed every possible computation). I don't think you can even verify the outcome without performing all the computations, when there's a cycle involving all possible outcomes. This is just the traveling salesman problem. John Moser (talk) 21:24, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
- The Schulze tie-breaker is a shortest path problem, not a travelling salesman problem. It might happen that the shortest path goes through all nodes; but this is not a requirement. Markus Schulze 12:31, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
Relevancy of this article
editThis article discusses and obscure voting rule, which is (I) not used in practise (II) not mentioned in any academic paper (III) not mentioned by anyone except the creator of the method (IIII) extremely hard to grasp and badly described. Is this article still up to the modern Wikipedia standard? 2003:CC:CF35:8700:C803:FFB4:789D:5936 (talk) 17:14, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Core stability
edit@MarkusSchulze Does Schulze STV have any notable stable winner set (or local stability) properties? –Maximum Limelihood Estimator 01:25, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- On page 409 of the latest version of my paper, I introduce the "Smith criterion for multi-winner elections". Markus Schulze 20:06, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oh wow, that's super interesting—thank you so much! :) –Maximum Limelihood Estimator 03:51, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Is Schulze STV, STV?
edit@MarkusSchulze is Schulze STV really a "single transferable vote" in any meaningful sense, or just a proportional variant of Schulze? Does the mechanism involve surplus vote transfers? Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 03:11, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- This is similar to CPO-STV. Votes are only transferred when the strength between two winning sets is calculated. Markus Schulze 09:43, 18 June 2024 (UTC)