wedrifid comments on Arrow's Theorem is a Lie - Less Wrong

27 Post author: alyssavance 24 October 2009 08:46PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (62)

Comments (62)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: wedrifid 26 October 2009 05:10:57AM *  2 points [-]

Neither of those fulfills the relevant functional definition of determinism.

Exactly. Both do or both don't. As (I assume) you were implying with your earlier question, ties in this system are broken either arbitrarily (limited dictator situation) or functionally randomly. Which of these categories 'alphabetical' and 'PI picking' could vary by assumption but one of the two is implied.

The same inputs either do or do not lead to the same outputs; if they do, then it is deterministic and subject to Arrow, and if they do not, they they are functionally random.

Yes.

Comment author: Technologos 26 October 2009 05:29:30AM 0 points [-]

The suggested methods for tiebreaking are therefore not helpful, because the voters have to know the voting function beforehand, without even epistemic randomness. I was just noting that this system is extremely sensitive to tactical voting on the margin.

Comment author: wedrifid 26 October 2009 05:31:19AM *  0 points [-]

The suggested methods for tiebreaking are therefore not helpful, because the voters have to know the voting function beforehand, without even epistemic randomness. I was just noting that this system is extremely sensitive to tactical voting on the margin.

So was I. (I was expanding grandparent somewhat along these lines as you were replying.)

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit