Graduated majority judgment

Graduated majority judgment (GMJ), sometimes called the usual judgment or continuous Bucklin voting, is a single-winner electoral system. It was invented independently three times in the early 21st century. It was first suggested as an improvement on majority judgment by Andrew Jennings in 2010,[1] then by Jameson Quinn,[citation needed] and later independently by the French social scientist Adrien Fabre in 2019.[2] In 2024, the latter coined the name "median judgment" for the rule, arguing it was the best highest median voting rule.[3]

It is a highest median voting rule, a system of cardinal voting in which the winner is decided by the median rating rather than the mean.[2]

GMJ begins by counting all ballots for their first choice. If no candidate has a majority then later (second, third, etc.) preferences are added to first preferences until one candidate reaches 50% of the vote. The first candidate to reach a majority of the vote is the winner.

  1. ^ Jennings, Andrew (2010). Monotonicity and Manipulability of Ordinal and Cardinal Social Choice Functions (PDF). Arizona State University. pp. 25–30.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link)
  2. ^ a b Fabre, Adrien (2021). "Tie-breaking the highest median: alternatives to the majority judgment". Social Choice and Welfare. 56: 101–124. doi:10.1007/s00355-020-01269-9. S2CID 226196615 – via Springer Link.
  3. ^ Fabre, Adrien. "I propose to coin the term MEDIAN JUDGMENT for a voting rule that is known both as the "usual judgment" and the "graduated majority judgment". I have just had an Aha moment: this rule deserves the title of the best highest-median voting rule. Let me explain why". X.

© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search