Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://cris.utm.md/handle/5014/320
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBOLUN, Ionen_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-04-09T12:13:34Z-
dc.date.available2020-04-09T12:13:34Z-
dc.date.issued2019-12-23-
dc.identifier.citationBolun, Ion. (2019). CHARACTERISTICS OF SOME APPORTIONMENT METHODS. Journal of Engineering Science, XXVI (4), 23–44. http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3591578en_US
dc.identifier.issn2587-3474-
dc.identifier.issn2587-3482-
dc.identifier.urihttp://cris.utm.md/handle/5014/320-
dc.description.abstractIn this work known main characteristics of 11 apportionment methods are systemized, including the Hondt, Hamilton, Sainte-Laguë and Huntington-Hill methods, and some new ones are determined by computer simulation. To such characteristics, refer the disproportionality of solutions and the percentage of Quota rule violation, of the Alabama, Population and New state paradoxes occur and of favoring of beneficiaries. For a large range of initial data, where determined the preferences order of the explored apportionment methods by each of these characteristics. No one of methods is preferable by all of the six characteristics-criteria. Of the immune to the three paradoxes, d’Hondt, Huntington-Hill, Sainte-Laguë and adapted Sainte-Laguë methods, by disproportionality of solutions the best is Sainte-Laguë method, followed by the adapted Sainte-Laguë, then by the Huntington-Hill and, finally, by the d’Hondt one. The same order for these four methods is by compliance with the Quota rule. The percentage of Sainte-Laguë method’s Quota rule violation is little influenced by the total number of seats value, but it strongly decreases (over 400 times) with the increase of the number of states – from approx. 0.045% for 4 states, up to 0.0001-0.0004% for 30 states. Based on multi-aspectual comparative analyses, it is shown that from explored methods there is reasonable to use, in specific areas, only three or four: the Hamilton, Sainte-Laguë and Adapted Sainte-Laguë methods and may be the Quota linear divisor one.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Engineering Scienceen_US
dc.subjectapportionment paradoxesen_US
dc.subjectcomparative analysesen_US
dc.subjectcomputer simulationen_US
dc.subjectdisproportionality of solutionsen_US
dc.subjectfavoring of beneficiariesen_US
dc.subjectqualitative characteristicsen_US
dc.subjectquantitative characteristicsen_US
dc.titleCharacterization of some apportionment methodsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.5281/zenodo.3591578-
item.grantfulltextopen-
item.languageiso639-1other-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
crisitem.author.deptDepartment of Software Engineering and Automatics-
crisitem.author.parentorgFaculty of Computers, Informatics and Microelectronics-
Appears in Collections:Journal Articles
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
JES-2019-4_23-44.pdf1.92 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.