This situation where each voter is not equal in the number of votes they control is called:

Similar documents
This situation where each voter is not equal in the number of votes they control is called:

The Mathematics of Power: Weighted Voting

In this lecture, we will explore weighted voting systems further. Examples of shortcuts to determining winning coalitions and critical players.

Check off these skills when you feel that you have mastered them. Identify if a dictator exists in a given weighted voting system.

Chapter 11. Weighted Voting Systems. For All Practical Purposes: Effective Teaching

2 The Mathematics of Power. 2.1 An Introduction to Weighted Voting 2.2 The Banzhaf Power Index. Topic 2 // Lesson 02

Lecture 7 A Special Class of TU games: Voting Games

Homework 4 solutions

12.3 Weighted Voting Systems

Kybernetika. František Turnovec Fair majorities in proportional voting. Terms of use: Persistent URL:

Warm-up Day 3 Given these preference schedules, identify the Plurality, Borda, Runoff, Sequential Runoff, and Condorcet winners.

A Mathematical View on Voting and Power

Fairness Criteria. Review: Election Methods

On Axiomatization of Power Index of Veto

NOTES. Power Distribution in Four-Player Weighted Voting Systems

Math for Liberal Arts MAT 110: Chapter 12 Notes

Warm-up Day 3. Phones OFF and in pockets! 1) Given these preference schedules, identify the Condorcet, Runoff, and Sequential Runoff winners.

Seminar on Applications of Mathematics: Voting. EDB Hong Kong Science Museum,

Weighted Voting. Lecture 12 Section 2.1. Robb T. Koether. Hampden-Sydney College. Fri, Sep 15, 2017

Thema Working Paper n Université de Cergy Pontoise, France

BOOK REVIEW BY DAVID RAMSEY, UNIVERSITY OF LIMERICK, IRELAND

Weighted Voting. Lecture 13 Section 2.1. Robb T. Koether. Hampden-Sydney College. Mon, Feb 12, 2018

A Geometric and Combinatorial Interpretation of Weighted Games

The Impact of Turkey s Membership on EU Voting. Richard Baldwin and Mika Widgrén. Abstract

Mathematics of the Electoral College. Robbie Robinson Professor of Mathematics The George Washington University

An empirical comparison of the performance of classical power indices. Dennis Leech

A comparison between the methods of apportionment using power indices: the case of the U.S. presidential election

Who benefits from the US withdrawal of the Kyoto protocol?

For the Encyclopedia of Power, ed. by Keith Dowding (SAGE Publications) Nicholas R. Miller 3/28/07. Voting Power in the U.S.

Louis M. Edwards Mathematics Super Bowl Valencia Community College -- April 30, 2004

Power in Voting Games and Canadian Politics

Voting and Apportionment(Due with Final Exam)

MATH 1340 Mathematics & Politics

The Electoral College

APPLICATION: PIVOTAL POLITICS

A priori veto power of the president of Poland Jacek W. Mercik 12

Turkey: Economic Reform and Accession to the European Union

A Theory of Spoils Systems. Roy Gardner. September 1985

Lecture 8 A Special Class of TU games: Voting Games

The Integer Arithmetic of Legislative Dynamics

Math of Election APPORTIONMENT

POWER VOTING. Degree Thesis BY NIKÉ S. PANTA. BSc Mathematics Mathematical Analyst Specialisation. Supervisor:

Two-dimensional voting bodies: The case of European Parliament

AP Comparative Government and Politics

Volkswagen vs. Porsche. A Power-Index Analysis.

Coalitional Game Theory

Compare the vote Level 3

A New Method of the Single Transferable Vote and its Axiomatic Justification

Compare the vote Level 1

House Copy OLS Copy Public Copy For Official House Use BILL NO. Date of Intro. Ref.

One Man, Votes: A Mathematical Analysis of the Electoral College

Standard Voting Power Indexes Do Not Work: An Empirical Analysis

Nine of the 13 states had to approve the Constitution in. order for it to be the law of the land. This happened on June 21,

IMF Governance and the Political Economy of a Consolidated European Seat

Allocation of Seats and Voting Power in the Norwegian Parliament

Unit: The Legislative Branch

1 von :46

DE FACTO CONTROL: APPLYING GAME THEORY TO THE LAW ON CORPORATE NATIONALITY. By Russell Stanley Q. Geronimo *

Math 13 Liberal Arts Math HW7 Chapter Give an example of a weighted voting system that has a dummy voter but no dictator that is not [6:5,3,1].

REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY - HOW TO ACHIEVE IT

WARWICK ECONOMIC RESEARCH PAPERS

The Election What is the function of the electoral college today? What are the flaws in the electoral college?

Three Branches, One Government

Do Now. Who do you think has more power a representative/senator, the president, or a Supreme Court justice? Why?

Notes for Session 7 Basic Voting Theory and Arrow s Theorem

Presidential Election Democrat Grover Cleveland versus Benjamin Harrison. ************************************ Difference of 100,456

Fair Division in Theory and Practice

due date: Monday, August 29 (first day of school) estimated time: 3-4 hours (for planning purposes only; work until you finish)

Two-Tier Voting: Solving the Inverse Power Problem and Measuring Inequality

Rounding decimals or fractions to whole numbers might seem to be one of the most boring subjects ever.

An Overview on Power Indices

Social welfare functions

Standard Voting Power Indexes Don t Work: An Empirical Analysis 1

Annick Laruelle and Federico Valenciano: Voting and collective decision-making

POLITICAL LITERACY. Unit 1

Decision Making in Europe: Were Spain and Poland Right to Stop the Constitution in December 2003? 1

SHAPLEY VALUE 1. Sergiu Hart 2

Fair Division in Theory and Practice

MATH4999 Capstone Projects in Mathematics and Economics Topic 3 Voting methods and social choice theory

THE SOUTH AUSTRALIAN LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL: POSSIBLE CHANGES TO ITS ELECTORAL SYSTEM

Why are there only two major parties in US? [party attachments below]

A Simulative Approach for Evaluating Electoral Systems

Campaign Strategy Script

Chapter 4 The Mathematics of Apportionment

The United States Constitution & The Illinois Constitution. Study Guide

THE PRO S AND CON S OF THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE SYSTEM

Voting Power in the Bretton Woods Institutions

Interdisciplinary Teaching Grant Proposal. Applicants:

Voting power in the Electoral College: The noncompetitive states count, too

Voting Power in US Presidential Elections under a Modified Popular Vote Plan

THE USEFULNESS OF THE INDEX METHOD FOR THE ANALYSIS OF THE RELEVANCE OF POLITICAL PARTIES*

EU Decision-making and the Allocation of Responsibility

CAN FAIR VOTING SYSTEMS REALLY MAKE A DIFFERENCE?

Article I. Article III. Article IV. Article V. Article VI. Article VII

Satisfaction Approval Voting

Mathematics and Social Choice Theory. Topic 4 Voting methods with more than 2 alternatives. 4.1 Social choice procedures

Square root voting system, optimal treshold and π

As you may have heard, there has been some discussion about possibly changing Canada's electoral system. We want to ask people their views on this.

Class Period THE US CONSTITUTION. 2. Compare Article I with Article II. Which article is longer and more detailed? WHY do you suppose it s longer?

Article I: Sec 1: Sec 2: Sec 3: Sec 4: Sec 5: Sec 6: Sec 7: Sec 8: Sec 9: Sec. 10: Article II: Sec 1: Sec 2:

Transcription:

Finite Mathematics Notes Chapter 2: The Mathematics of Power (Weighted Voting) Academic Standards: PS.ED.2: Use election theory techniques to analyze election data. Use weighted voting techniques to decide voting power within a group. ONE PERSON ONE VOTE is an democratic idea of equality But what if the voters are not PEOPLE but are governments? countries? states? If the institutions are not equal, then the number of votes they control should not be equal. The United Nations Security Council 15 voting nations: 5 permanent members (Britain, China, France, Russia, United States), 10 nonpermanent members appointed for a 2-year rotation. Permanent members have more votes than non permanent members. Stock Holders/Shareholders : The more stock you own, the more say you have in decision making for the company. The Electoral College Each state gets a number of electors (votes) equal to the number of Senators plus the number of Representatives in Congress. California has 55 votes but North Dakota only has 3 votes. Each state is a voter but states with heavy concentration of population receive a bigger vote. This situation where each voter is not equal in the number of votes they control is called: 2.1 Weighted Voting Important terms: : A voting situation where voters are not necessarily equal in the number of votes they control. : A vote with only two choices. (usually yes/no) : The voters (symbolized by P 1, P 2, P 3, etc.) : The number of votes a player controls. : The smallest number of votes required to pass a motion. 1

Notation Example 1. [14: 8, 6, 5, 1] [q: w 1, w 2, w 3,..., w n ] q = w s = quota = total votes = Player 1 (P 1) = controls votes / has a weight of Player 2 (P 2) = controls votes Player 3 (P 3) = controls votes Player 4 (P 4) = controls vote Example 2. Given the weighted voting system [16: 8, 6, 4, 4, 3, 1], state the following: The number of players (N): The weight of P 5: The total number of votes (V): The minimum % of the quota to nearest whole %: Common Types of Quotas: Simple majority/strict majority Two-thirds majority Unanimity U.S. Senate: Simple Majority to pass an ordinary law (51 votes) 60 votes to stop a filibuster 2/3 of the votes (67) to override a presidential veto. Example 3. A group of friends decide to start a small business. For every $100 they invest in the business, the receive one vote. The weights of the friends are shown in the table. They decide that the quota will be set at a simple majority or more of the votes. a) What is the total number of players, N? Name Votes Susan 14 Peter 10 Edmund 25 Lucy 18 Tumnus 5 b) What is the total number of votes, V? c) Describe as a weighted voting system using standard notation. 2

Weighted Voting Issues Example 4: Four partners decide to start a business. P 1 buys 8 shares, P 2 buys 7 shares, P 3 buys 3 shares and P 4 buys 2 shares. One share = one vote. a. The quota is set at 13 votes. Describe as a weighted voting system in standard notation. b. The partnership above decides the quota is too high and changes the quota to 10 votes. c. The partnership above decides to make the quota equal to 21 votes. For a weighted voting system to be legal: the quota must be at least a and no more than V Symbolically: If V w1 w2 w3... wn, then q V 2 d. What if our partnership changed the quota to 19? Example 5. [q: 7, 2, 1, 1, 1] a) What is the smallest value that the quota can take? b) What is the largest value that the quota can take? 3

Example 6: [q: 36, 32, 8, 8, 4] c) What is the value of the quota if at least three-fourths of the votes are required to pass a motion? more than three-fourths of the votes are required? Dictators, Dummies, and Veto Power VOCAB: A is a player whose weight is greater than or equal to the quota. Example 7: [11: 12, 5, 4] P 1 has all the power P 2 and P 3 have no power Note: If any player is a dictator, then EVERY OTHER PLAYER is a dummy. Even if there is no dictator, there may still be dummies. VOCAB: A player has if they are not a dictator, but they can keep the other players from combining their votes to meet the quota. Not every weighted voting system has someone with veto power. Sometimes MANY players can have veto power. Example 8: [30: 10, 10, 10, 9] Example 9: [12: 9, 5, 4, 2] 4

Example 11. Determine which players, if any, are dictators or have veto power. a) [15: 16, 8, 4, 1] b) [18: 16, 8, 4, 1] c) [24: 16, 8, 4, 1] Example 12. Consider [q: 8, 7, 2]. Find the smallest value of q for which a) all three players have veto power b) P 2 has veto power, but P 3 does not 2.2/2.4A The Banzhaf Power Index/Counting SUBSETS Who is the most POWERFUL player? : A group of players who choose to vote together {A SUBSET OF THE VOTERS} : The set of all voters. This represents a unanimous vote. Weight of the coalition: Winning coalitions Losing coalitions : Any player who MUST BE PRESENT in a winning coalition in order for it to remain a winning coalition. Note: If you subtract the critical player s votes from the coalition, the number of votes drops below the quota. 5

Example 1: Find the critical player or critical players in each of the following coalitions. [15: 13, 9, 5, 2] a) {P 1, P 4} b) {P 2, P 3, P 4} c) {P 3, P 4} d) {P 1, P 2, P 3} [51: 30, 25, 25, 20] a) {P 1, P 3} b) {P 1, P 2, P 3} c) {P 2, P 3, P 4} d) {P 2, P 3} The Banzhaf Power Index: A player s power is proportional to the number of coalitions for which that player is critical. The more often a player is critical, the more power he holds. Example 2: A weighted voting system with three players has the following winning coalitions (with critical players underlined). Find the Banzhaf Power Distribution for the weighted voting system. TO FIND THE BANZHAF POWER DISTRIBUTION: 1. Write down all winning coalitions. 2. Underline (circle/highlight) the critical player(s) in each winning coalition. 3. Determine the total critical count, T (total number of underlines) 4. Determine each player s critical count, Bn 5. Banzhaf Power = B n T 6

Counting Subsets: How do you know you have all the possible coalitions written down? If n = number of players in a weighted voting system, Be systematic or use the formula! Then the number of possible subsets is: 2 n 1 How many coalitions (subsets) of 4 players? How many coalitions (subsets) of 5 players? Example 3: Find the Banzhaf Power index for the weighted voting system: [101: 99, 98, 3] Banzhaf Coalitions: 3 Players {P1} {P1,P2} {P1, P2, P3} {P2} {P1,P3} {P3} {P2,P3} 7

Example 4: Find the Banzhaf Power Distribution for [40: 30, 20, 10] Banzhaf Coalitions: 3 Players {P1} {P1,P2} {P1, P2, P3} {P2} {P1,P3} {P3} {P2,P3} Example 4: Find the Banzhaf Power Distribution for [6: 4, 3, 2, 1] Banzhaf Coalitions: 4 Players {P1} {P1,P2} {P1, P2, P3} {P2} {P1,P3} {P1, P2, P4} {P3} {P1,P4} {P1, P3, P4} {P4} {P2,P3} {P2, P3, P4} {P2,P4} {P1, P2, P3, P4} {P3,P4} Example 5: Consider the weighted voting system. Find the Banzhaf Power Distribution of this weighted voting system when: a) [ 15: 10, 8, 6, 4} b) [12: 12, 8, 1, 1] Banzhaf Coalitions: 4 Players {P1} {P1,P2} {P1, P2, P3} {P2} {P1,P3} {P1, P2, P4} {P3} {P1,P4} {P1, P3, P4} {P4} {P2,P3} {P2, P3, P4} {P2,P4} {P1, P2, P3, P4} {P3,P4} Banzhaf Coalitions: 4 Players {P1} {P1,P2} {P1, P2, P3} {P2} {P1,P3} {P1, P2, P4} {P3} {P1,P4} {P1, P3, P4} {P4} {P2,P3} {P2, P3, P4} {P2,P4} {P1, P2, P3, P4} {P3,P4} What I expect to see for work on your homework: 1. Write down all possible coalitions and cross off losers OR just the winning coalitions. 2. Critical Players should be circled or underlined. 3. Show fraction of BPI for each player AND calculate the % for BPD. 8

Where weighted voting systems/banzhaf are used: Banzhaf is used to QUANTIFY the amount of power each player holds. 1. Nassau County Board of Supervisors (see p. 55): Votes were given to districts according to population and quota was simple majority. [58: 31, 31, 28, 21, 2, 2] Banzhaf showed that two of the six counties actually had no voting power that they were actually dummy voters. Final result: 1993 court decision abolishing weighted voting in New York States. Districts were created of roughly the same population and each given one voted. 2. United Nations Security Council: Banzhaf shows that a permanent member of the council holds more than 10 times the amount of power as one of the non-permanent members. There are 5 permanent members (Britain, China, France, Russia, US) and 10 non-permanent members. This voting arrangement may change as others are being considered for permanent membership. 3. European Union Banzhaf quantifies the amount of power each nation has and shows that smaller nations such as Luxembourg and Malta still hold some power. 9

2.4/2.5 The Shapley Shubik Power Index: The Shapley-Shubik Power Index: A player s power is proportional to the number of sequential-coalitions for which that player is pivotal. The more times a player is pivotal, the more power he holds. Sequential coalition: Banzhaf: { P1, P2, P3} Shapley-Shubik: P 1, P 3, P 2 These 3 players decide to vote together. These 3 players decide to vote together. They form a coalition. P1 votes 1 st, P3 votes 2 nd, P2 votes 3 rd. Order listed in the { } doesn t matter. They form a sequential coalition. Order listed in the is important. Pivotal player: Example 1: Find the Pivotal Player Given the weighted voting system [5: 3,2,1,1} find the pivotal player for the given sequential coalition. a) [P 1,P 4,P 3,P 2] b) [P 3,P 1,P 2,P 4] c) [P 4,P 3,P 2,P 1] 10

Counting Sequential Coalitions: A sequential coalition is really just a permutation of List the possible sequence for 3 players. How many are there? How many sequential coalitions are there for 5 players? Shapley-Shubik Power Distribution Example 2. A weighted voting system has three players. The sequential coalitions are listed below with the pivotal player underlined in each. Find the Shapley-Shubik Power Distribution for the weighted voting system. Multiplication Rule: If there are m ways to do task 1 and n ways to do task 2, then there are mxn ways to do both tasks together. Factorials: If N= the number of players, then the number of sequential coalitions is N! N! = N x (N-1) x... x 3 x 2 x 1 TO FIND THE Shapley-Shubik POWER DISTRIBUTION: 1. Write down all N! sequential coalitions. 2. Underline (circle/highlight) the pivotal player(s) in each winning coalition. 3. Determine each player s pivotal count, SSn Example 3. A weighted voting system has four players. The sequential coalitions are listed below with the pivotal player underlined in each. Find the Shapley-Shubik Power Distribution for the weighted voting system. 4. Shapley Shubik Power = SS n N! 11

Example 4: Find the Shapely Shubik Power Distribution for [4: 3, 2, 1] Sequential Coalitions: 3 Players [P1,P2,P3] [P1,P3,P2] [P2,P1,P3] [P2,P3,P1] [P3,P1,P2] [P3,P2,P1] Example 5: Find the Shapley-Shubik Power Distribution for [6: 4, 3, 2, 1] Sequential Coalitions: 4 Players [P 1,P 2,P 3,P 4] [P 2,P 1,P 3,P 4] [P 3,P 1,P 2,P 4] [P 4,P 1,P 2,P 3] [P 1,P 2,P 4,P 3] [P 2,P 1,P 4,P 3] [P 3,P 1,P 4,P 2] [P 4,P 1,P 3,P 2] [P 1,P 3,P 2,P 4] [P 2,P 3,P 1,P 4] [P 3,P 2,P 1,P 4] [P 4,P 2,P 1,P 3] [P 1,P 3,P 4,P 2] [P 2,P 3,P 4,P 1] [P 3,P 2,P 4,P 1] [P 4,P 2,P 3,P 1] [P 1,P 4,P 2,P 3] [P 2,P 4,P 1,P 3] [P 3,P 4,P 1,P 2] [P 4,P 3,P 1,P 2] [P 1,P 4,P 3,P 2] [P 2,P 4,P 3,P 1] [P 3,P 4,P 2,P 1] [P 4,P 3,P 2,P 1] Example 6: Find the Shapley-Shubik Power Distribution for [15:10, 8, 4, 2 ] Sequential Coalitions: 4 Players [P 1,P 2,P 3,P 4] [P 2,P 1,P 3,P 4] [P 3,P 1,P 2,P 4] [P 4,P 1,P 2,P 3] [P 1,P 2,P 4,P 3] [P 2,P 1,P 4,P 3] [P 3,P 1,P 4,P 2] [P 4,P 1,P 3,P 2] [P 1,P 3,P 2,P 4] [P 2,P 3,P 1,P 4] [P 3,P 2,P 1,P 4] [P 4,P 2,P 1,P 3] [P 1,P 3,P 4,P 2] [P 2,P 3,P 4,P 1] [P 3,P 2,P 4,P 1] [P 4,P 2,P 3,P 1] [P 1,P 4,P 2,P 3] [P 2,P 4,P 1,P 3] [P 3,P 4,P 1,P 2] [P 4,P 3,P 1,P 2] [P 1,P 4,P 3,P 2] [P 2,P 4,P 3,P 1] [P 3,P 4,P 2,P 1] [P 4,P 3,P 2,P 1] 12