博尔达计数法的谬误--为什么它对群体智能毫无用处,也不应用于包括银行客户服务在内的大数据?

Hao Wang
{"title":"博尔达计数法的谬误--为什么它对群体智能毫无用处,也不应用于包括银行客户服务在内的大数据?","authors":"Hao Wang","doi":"10.1051/shsconf/202317904008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Borda Count Method is an important theory in the field of voting theory. The basic idea and implementation methodology behind the approach is simple and straight forward. Borda Count Method has been used in sports award evaluations and many other scenarios, and therefore is an important aspect of our society. An often ignored ground truth is that online cultural rating platforms such as Douban.com and Goodreads.com often adopt integer rating values for large scale public audience, and therefore leading to Poisson/Pareto behavior. In this paper, we rely on the theory developed by Wang from 2021 to 2023 to demonstrate that online cultural rating platform rating data often evolve into Poisson/Pareto behavior, and individualistic voting preferences are predictable without any data input, so Borda Count Method (or, Range Voting Method) has intrinsic fallacy and should not be used as a voting theory method.","PeriodicalId":499680,"journal":{"name":"SHS web of conferences","volume":"53 s44","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Fallacy of Borda Count Method - Why it is Useless with Group Intelligence and Shouldn’t be Used with Big Data including Banking Customer Services\",\"authors\":\"Hao Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1051/shsconf/202317904008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Borda Count Method is an important theory in the field of voting theory. The basic idea and implementation methodology behind the approach is simple and straight forward. Borda Count Method has been used in sports award evaluations and many other scenarios, and therefore is an important aspect of our society. An often ignored ground truth is that online cultural rating platforms such as Douban.com and Goodreads.com often adopt integer rating values for large scale public audience, and therefore leading to Poisson/Pareto behavior. In this paper, we rely on the theory developed by Wang from 2021 to 2023 to demonstrate that online cultural rating platform rating data often evolve into Poisson/Pareto behavior, and individualistic voting preferences are predictable without any data input, so Borda Count Method (or, Range Voting Method) has intrinsic fallacy and should not be used as a voting theory method.\",\"PeriodicalId\":499680,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"SHS web of conferences\",\"volume\":\"53 s44\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"SHS web of conferences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"0\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202317904008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SHS web of conferences","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202317904008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

博尔达计数法是投票理论领域的一个重要理论。该方法的基本思想和实施方法简单明了。博尔达计数法已被用于体育评奖和其他许多场景,因此是我们社会的一个重要方面。一个经常被忽视的基本事实是,豆瓣网和 Goodreads.com 等网络文化评分平台经常对大规模的公众受众采用整数评分值,从而导致泊松/帕雷托行为。本文以王晓东在2021-2023年间提出的理论为基础,论证了网络文化评分平台的评分数据往往演化为泊松/帕雷托行为,而个体化的投票偏好在没有任何数据输入的情况下是可以预测的,因此博尔达计数法(或称范围投票法)存在内在谬误,不应作为投票理论方法使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Fallacy of Borda Count Method - Why it is Useless with Group Intelligence and Shouldn’t be Used with Big Data including Banking Customer Services
Borda Count Method is an important theory in the field of voting theory. The basic idea and implementation methodology behind the approach is simple and straight forward. Borda Count Method has been used in sports award evaluations and many other scenarios, and therefore is an important aspect of our society. An often ignored ground truth is that online cultural rating platforms such as Douban.com and Goodreads.com often adopt integer rating values for large scale public audience, and therefore leading to Poisson/Pareto behavior. In this paper, we rely on the theory developed by Wang from 2021 to 2023 to demonstrate that online cultural rating platform rating data often evolve into Poisson/Pareto behavior, and individualistic voting preferences are predictable without any data input, so Borda Count Method (or, Range Voting Method) has intrinsic fallacy and should not be used as a voting theory method.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信