Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The two names for these methods—highest averages and divisors—reflect two different ways of thinking about them, and their two independent inventions. However, both procedures are equivalent and give the same answer. [1] Divisor methods are based on rounding rules, defined using a signpost sequence post(k), where k ≤ post(k) ≤ k+1.
Huntington-Hill uses a continuity correction as a compromise, given by taking the geometric mean of both divisors, i.e.: [4] A n = P n ( n + 1 ) {\displaystyle A_{n}={\frac {P}{\sqrt {n(n+1)}}}} where P is the population of the state, and n is the number of seats it currently holds before the possible allocation of the next seat.
An apportionment method is denoted by a multivalued function (,); a particular -solution is a single-valued function (,) which selects a single apportionment from (,). A partial apportionment method is an apportionment method for specific fixed values of n {\displaystyle n} and h {\displaystyle h} ; it is a multivalued function M ∗ ( t ...
The D'Hondt method, [a] also called the Jefferson method or the greatest divisors method, is an apportionment method for allocating seats in parliaments among federal states, or in proportional representation among political parties.
A quota-capped divisor method is an apportionment method where we begin by assigning every state its lower quota of seats. Then, we add seats one-by-one to the state with the highest votes-per-seat average, so long as adding an additional seat does not result in the state exceeding its upper quota. [ 3 ]
[3] [11]: Sec.5 The European Parliament (Representation) Act 2003 stipulates each region must be allocated at least 3 seats and that the ratio of electors to seats is as nearly as possible the same for each, the Commission found the Sainte-Laguë method produced the smallest standard deviation when compared to the D'Hondt method and Hare quota.
An apportionment paradox is a situation where an apportionment—a rule for dividing discrete objects according to some proportional relationship—produces results that violate notions of common sense or fairness. Certain quantities, like milk, can be divided in any proportion whatsoever; others, such as horses, cannot—only whole numbers ...
When using the Hare quota, this rule is called Hamilton's method, and is the third-most common apportionment rule worldwide (after Jefferson's method and Webster's method). [ 1 ] Despite their intuitive definition, quota methods are generally disfavored by social choice theorists as a result of apportionment paradoxes .