【摘要】 在经典的投票方法中,Borda评分法很好地集结了决策者对各方案的完全偏好序,但却忽略了各方案间偏好强度的差别;Goodman-Markowitz法考虑了偏好强度,但却避免不了决策者在给定辨别力等级时的随意性.通过提出“有争议”的概念,认为偏好强度不应该是等差数列,而应该是迅速递减的数列,从而解决了Borda评分法不考虑偏好强度及Goodman-Markowitz法在给出辨别力等级时的随意性两个问题.对该方法的相关特性进行了简单的讨论,分析了无法满足Arrow提出的无关方案独立性公理的原因并提出了解决该问题的办法,同时就防策略投票问题提出了自己的思路.更多还原

【Abstract】 Among the classical voting methods,Borda count method can easily synthesize the decision makers’ partial order about the alternatives,but it ignores the preference intensity between each alternative.On the other hand,Goodman-Markowitz method considers the preference intensity of each alternative,but it fail to overcome the arbitrariness when giving the discerning grades.The notion about "disputed" is proposed,considering that the preference intensity should not be arithmetical progression but a faster degrading progression,so as to solve the problems that Borda count method not considering the intensity of preference and the arbitrariness of Goodman-Markowitz method when giving the discerning grades.Some characters of this method are discussed,the reason why the method would not meet the axiom that indifferent alternative with independency proposed by Arrow is discussed,and the way to solve this problem is proposed.Some methods about how to avoid tactic voting are proposed at the same time.更多还原