enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Sainte-Laguë method - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sainte-Laguë_method

    The Jefferson/D'Hondt method favors larger parties while the Webster/Sainte-Laguë method doesn't. [9] The Webster/Sainte-Laguë method is generally seen as more proportional, but risks an outcome where a party with more than half the votes can win fewer than half the seats. [31] When there are two parties, the Webster method is the unique ...

  3. Mathematics of apportionment - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematics_of_apportionment

    Among the divisor methods: [7]: Thm.9.1, 9.2, 9.3 Jefferson's method is the unique split-proof divisor method; Adams's method is the unique merge-proof divisor method; Webster's method is neither split-proof nor merge-proof, but it is "coalition neutral": when votes are distributed randomly (with uniform remainders), a coalition is equally ...

  4. Highest averages method - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highest_averages_method

    The Sainte-Laguë or Webster method, first described in 1832 by American statesman and senator Daniel Webster and later independently in 1910 by the French mathematician André Sainte-Lague, uses the fencepost sequence post(k) = k+.5 (i.e. 0.5, 1.5, 2.5); this corresponds to the standard rounding rule. Equivalently, the odd integers (1, 3, 5 ...

  5. United States congressional apportionment - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States...

    Allocation of seats by state, as percentage of overall number of representatives in the House, 1789–2020 census. United States congressional apportionment is the process [1] by which seats in the United States House of Representatives are distributed among the 50 states according to the most recent decennial census mandated by the United States Constitution.

  6. Apportionment paradox - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apportionment_paradox

    The converse is not true, however. Webster's method can be free of incoherence and maintain quota when there are three states. All sensible methods satisfy both criteria in the trivial two-state case. [4] [5] They show a proof of impossibility: apportionment methods may have a subset of these properties, but cannot have all of them:

  7. Seat bias - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seat_bias

    Using United States census data, Balinski and Young argued Webster's method is the least median-biased estimator for comparing pairs of states, followed closely by the Huntington-Hill method. [1] However, researchers have found that under other definitions or metrics for bias, the Huntington-Hill method can also be described as least biased. [2]

  8. D'Hondt method - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D'Hondt_method

    The axiomatic properties of the D'Hondt method were studied and they proved that the D'Hondt method is a consistent and monotone method that reduces political fragmentation by encouraging coalitions. [1] [8] A method is consistent if it treats parties that received tied votes equally. Monotonicity means that the number of seats provided to any ...

  9. Quota rule - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quota_rule

    Since Jefferson was the first method used for Congressional apportionment in the United States, this violation led to a substantial problem where larger states often received more representatives than smaller states, which was not corrected until Webster's method was implemented in 1842. Although Webster's method can in theory violate the quota ...