Divisor-Based Biproportional Apportionment in Electoral Systems: A Real-Life Benchmark Study

References

• Anthonisse J. M. Proportional representation in a regional council. Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica (CWI) Newsletter (1984) December):22–29Google Scholar
• Balinski M. Fair majority voting (or how to eliminate gerrymandering). Amer. Math. Monthly (2008) 115:97–113Crossref, Google Scholar
• Balinski M., Pukelsheim F., Liski E. P., Isotalo J., Niemelä J., Puntanen S., Styan G. P. H. Matrices and politics. Festschrift for Tarmo Pukkila on His 60th Birthday (2006) (Department of Mathematics, Statistics, and Philosophy, University of Tampere, Finland) 233–242Google Scholar
• Balinski M. L. Wahlen in Mexico—Verhältniswahlrecht häppchenweise. Spektrum der Wissenschaft (2002) October):72–74Google Scholar
• Balinski M. L., Demange G. Algorithms for proportional matrices in reals and integers. Math. Programming (1989a) 45:193–210Crossref, Google Scholar
• Balinski M. L., Demange G. An axiomatic approach to proportionality between matrices. Math. Oper. Res. (1989b) 14:700–719Link, Google Scholar
• Balinski M. L., Rachev S. T. Rounding proportions: Methods of rounding. Math. Scientist (1997) 22:1–26Google Scholar
• Balinski M. L., Ramírez V. Mexico's 1997 apportionment defies its electoral law. Electoral Stud. (1999) 18:117–124Crossref, Google Scholar
• Balinski M. L., Young H. P.Fair Representation—Meeting the Ideal of One Man, One Vote (2001) 2nd ed.(Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC) Google Scholar
• Benoit K. Which electoral formula is the most proportional? A new look with new evidence. Political Anal. (2000) 8:381–388Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bochsler D. Biproportional electoral procedures for the Swiss Nationalrat. (2005) . Technical report, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany. http://www.opus-bayern.de/uni-augsburg/volltexte/2005/160Google Scholar
• Christensen N. B. Evaluating voting procedures using different criteria and computer simulations. Eur. Public Choice Soc. Annual Meeting (2003) Aarhus, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
• Cox L. H., Ernst L. R. Controlled rounding. INFOR (1982) 20:423–432Google Scholar
• De Meur G., Gassner M., Hubaut X. A mathematical model for political bipolarization. Eur. J. Political Res. (1985) 13:409–420Crossref, Google Scholar
• di Cortona P. G., Manzi C., Pennisi A., Ricca F., Simeone B.Evaluation and Optimization of Electoral Systems (1999) (SIAM, Philidelphia) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Elklit J., Gallagher M., Mitchell P. Denmark: Simplicity embedded in complexity (or is it the other way round?). The Politics of Electoral Systems (2005) (Oxford University Press, New York) 453–471Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ernst L. R. Apportionment methods for the House of Representatives and the court challenges. Management Sci. (1994) 40:1207–1227Link, Google Scholar
• Fragnelli V., Ortona G., Simeone B., Pukelsheim F. Comparison of electoral systems: Simulative and game theoretic approaches. Mathematics and Democracy: Recent Advances in Voting Systems and Collective Choice (2006) (Springer, Berlin) 65–81Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fragnelli V., Monella G., Ortona G. A simulative approach for evaluating electoral systems. Homo Oeconomicus (2005) 22:525–549Google Scholar
• Gaffke N., Pukelsheim F. Divisor methods for proportional representation systems: An optimization approach to vector and matrix problems. Math. Soc. Sci. (2008) 56:166–184Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gallagher M. Proportionality, disproportionality and electoral systems. Electoral Stud. (1991) 10:33–51Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gassner M. Two-dimensional rounding for a quasi-proportional representation. Eur. J. Political Econom. (1988) 4:529–538Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gassner M. Biproportional delegations: A solution for two-dimensional proportional representation. J. Theoret. Politics (1991) 3:321–342Crossref, Google Scholar
• Helgason T., Jörnsten K., Holmberg K. Entropy of proportional matrix apportionment. Proc. Nordic Math. Programming Meeting in Linköping (1994) Linköping University, Linköping, SwedenGoogle Scholar
• Helgason T., Jörnsten K., Migdalas A., Du D.-Z., Pardalos P. M. Maxmin formulation of the apportionments of seats to a parliament. Minimax and Applications (1994) (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, The Netherlands) 109–118Google Scholar
• James P. The Free State of Bavaria: A special case. Representation (1995) 33:17–20Crossref, Google Scholar
• Linial N., Samorodnitsky A., Wigderson A. A deterministic strongly polynomial algorithm for matrix scaling and approximate permanents. Combinatorica (2000) 20:545–568Crossref, Google Scholar
• Maier S., Simeone B., Pukelsheim F. Algorithms for biproportional apportionment. Mathematics and Democracy: Recent Advances in Voting Systems and Collective Choice (2006) (Springer, Berlin) 105–116Crossref, Google Scholar
• Maier S., Pukelsheim F. Bazi: A free computer program for proportional representation apportionment. (2007) . Preprint, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, GermanyGoogle Scholar
• Maier S., Pukelsheim F., Zachariasen M. Algorithms for divisor-based biproportional apportionment. (2010) . Working paper, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, GermanyGoogle Scholar
• Maier S., Zachariassen P., Zachariasen M. Divisor-based biproportional apportionment in electoral systems: A real-life benchmark study. (2007) . Technical Report 039/2007, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, GermanyGoogle Scholar
• Pennisi A., Simeone B., Pukelsheim F. The Italian bug: A flawed procedure for bi-proportional seat allocation. Mathematics and Democracy: Recent Advances in Voting Systems and Collective Choice (2006) (Springer, Berlin) 151–164Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pennisi A., Ricca F., Simeone B. Malfunzionamenti dell'allocazione biproporzionale di seggi nella riforma elettorale Italiana. (2005) . Technical Report 21, Sapienza University of Rome, RomeGoogle Scholar
• Pukelsheim F. BAZI—A Java program for proportional representation. Oberwolfach Reports (2004) 1:735–737Google Scholar
• Pukelsheim F., Simeone B., Pukelsheim F. Current issues of apportionment methods. Mathematics and Democracy: Recent Advances in Voting Systems and Collective Choice (2006) (Springer, Berlin) 168–176Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pukelsheim F., Schuhmacher C. Das neue Zürcher Zuteilungsverfahren für Parlamentswahlen. Aktuelle Juristische Praxis—Pratique Juridique Actuelle (2004) 5:505–522Google Scholar
• Ramírez V., Pukelsheim F., Palomares A., Martínez J. A bi-proportional method applied to the Spanish congress. Math. Comput. Model. (2008) 48:1461–1467Crossref, Google Scholar
• RManual R: A language and environment for statistical computing. (2006) . R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, ISBN 3-900051-07-0, http://www.R-project.orgGoogle Scholar
• Rote G., Vogel A. A heuristic for decomposing traffic matrices in TDMA satellite communication. ZOR—Methods and Models Oper. Res. (1993) 38:281–307Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rote G., Zachariasen M. Matrix scaling by network flow. Proc. Eighteenth Annual ACM-SIAM Sympos. Discrete Algorithms (2007) (SIAM, Philadelphia) 848–854Google Scholar
• Sinkhorn R. A relationship between arbitrary positive matrices and doubly stochastic matrices. Ann. Math. Statist. (1964) 35:876–879Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zachariasen M. Algorithmic aspects of divisor-based biproportional rounding. (2006) . Technical Report 06-05, DIKU, Department of Computer Science, University of Copenhagen, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
• Zachariassen P., Zachariasen M., Simeone B., Pukelsheim F. A comparison of electoral formulae for the Faroese Parliament (the Løgting). Mathematics and Democracy: Recent Advances in Voting Systems and Collective Choice (2006) (Springer, Berlin) 235–251Crossref, Google Scholar