References
- Abramson, P. R., Aldrich, J. H., Diskin, A., Houck, A. M., Levine, R., & Scotto, T. J. (2013). The British general election of 2010 under different voting rules. Electoral Studies, 32(1), 134–139. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2012.10.002
- Blanquero, R., & Carrizosa, E. (2013). Solving the median problem with continuous demand on a network. Computational Optimization and Applications, 56(3), 723–734. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10589-013-9574-3
- Buenrostro, L., Dhillon, A., & Vida, P. (2013). Scoring rule voting games and dominance solvability. Social Choice and Welfare, 40(2), 329–352. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-011-0602-x
- Cervone, D. P., Dai, R., Gnoutcheff, D., Lanterman, G., Mackenzie, A., Morse, A., Srivastava, N., & Zwicker, W. S. (2012). Voting with rubber bands, weights, and strings. Mathematical Social Sciences, 64(1), 11–27. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2011.08.003
- Chang, C. C., & Wu, C. L. (2019). Model of behavioural strategies for coping with party ambivalence. Political Science, 71(1), 17–39. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/00323187.2019.161-3733
- Ciuonzo, D., De Maio, A., & Salvo, R. P. (2015). A systematic framework for composite hypothesis testing of independent bernoulli trials. IEEE Signal Processing Letters, 22(9), 1249–1253. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1109/LSP.2015.2395811
- Ciuonzo, D., & Salvo, R. P. (2018). DECHADE: DEtecting slight changes with HArd decisions in wireless sensor networks. International Journal of General Systems, 47(5), 535–548. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/03081079.2018.1455192
- Drezner, Z. (2007). A general global optimization approach for solving location problems in the plane. Journal of Global Optimization, 37(2), 305–319. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10898-006-9051-y
- Drezner, Z., & Menezes, M. B. C. (2016). The wisdom of voters: Evaluating the Weber objective in the plane at the Condorcet solution. Annals of Operations Research, 246(1-2), 205–226. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-015-1906-5
- Drezner, Z., & Suzuki, A. (2004). The big triangle small triangle method for the solution of non-convex facility location problems. Operations Research, 52(1), 128–135. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.1030.0077
- Drezner, Z., & Wesolowsky, G. O. (1981). Optimum location probabilities in the lp distance Weber problem. Transportation Science, 15(2), 85–97. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1287/trsc.15.2.85
- Engstrom, R. L., & Engstrom, R. N. (2008). The majority vote rule and runoff primaries in the United States. Electoral Studies, 27(3), 407–416. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electst-ud.2008.04.009
- Fahrenberger, T. C., & Gersbach, H. (2010). Minority voting and long-term decisions. Games and Economic Behavior, 69(2), 329–345. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geb.2009.10.008
- Fahrenberger, T. C., & Gersbach, H. (2012). Preferences for harmony and minority voting. Mathematical Social Sciences, 63(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2011.06.002
- Gersbach, H. (2004). Dividing resources by flexible majority rules. Social Choice and Welfare, 23(2), 295–308. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-004-0314-6
- Gouret, F., Hollard, G., & Rossignol, S. (2011). An empirical analysis of valence in electoral competition. Social Choice and Welfare, 37(2), 309–340. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s00-355-010-0495-0
- Hernández Alexis, R., Gracia-Lázaro, C., Brigatti, E., & Moreno, Y. (2018). A networked voting rule for democratic representation. Royal Society Open Science, 5(3), 172265. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.172265
- Karasakal, E., & Silav, A. (2016). A multi-objective genetic algorithm for a bi-objective facility location problem with partial coverage. TOP, 24(1), 206–232. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11750-015-0386-8
- King, K. A., & Nesbit, T. M. (2009). The empirical estimation of the cost-minimizing jury size and voting rule in civil trials. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 71(2), 463–472. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2009.02.015
- Koch, S., & Mitlöhner, J. (2009). Software project effort estimation with voting rules. Decision Support Systems, 46(4), 895–901. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2008.12.002
- Konak, A., Kulturel-Konak, S., & Snyder, L. (2017). A multi-objective approach to the competitive facility location problem. Procedia Computer Science, 108, 1434–1442. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2017.05.035
- Lang, J., & Xia, L. (2009). Sequential composition of voting rules in multi-issue domains. Mathematical Social Sciences, 57(3), 304–324. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2008.12.010
- Leiter, D., Murr, A., Ramírez, E. R., & Stegmaier, M. (2018). Social networks and citizen election forecasting: The more friends the better. International Journal of Forecasting, 34(2), 235–248. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijforecast.2017.11.006
- Linzer, D., & Lewis-Beck, M. S. (2015). Forecasting US presidential elections: New approaches (an introduction). International Journal of Forecasting, 31(3), 895–897. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijforecast.2015.03.004
- Menezes, M. B. C., da Silveira, G. J. C. D., & Drezner, Z. (2016). Democratic elections and centralized decisions: Condorcet and approval voting compared with median and coverage locations. European Journal of Operational Research, 253(1), 195–203. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2016.02.002
- Menezes, M. B. C., & Huang, R. (2015). Comparison of condorcet and Weber solutions on a plane: Social choice versus centralization. Computers and Operations Research, 62, 350–355. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2013.12.007
- Miller, N. R. (2019). Reflections on arrow’s theorem and voting rules. Public Choice, 179(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-018-0524-6
- Murr, A. E. (2015). The wisdom of crowds: Applying condorcet's jury theorem to forecasting US presidential elections. International Journal of Forecasting, 31(3), 916–929. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijforecast.2014.12.002
- Niu, R., & Varshney, P. K. (2008). Performance analysis of distributed detection in a random sensor field. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 56(1), 339–349. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1109/TSP.2007.906770
- Ortiz-Astorquiza, C., Contreras, I., & Laporte, G. (2018). Multi-level facility location problems. European Journal of Operational Research, 267(3), 791–805. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2017.10.019
- Pivato, M. (2013). Voting rules as statistical estimators. Mpra Paper, 40(2), 581–630. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-011-0619-1
- Pivato, M. (2016). Asymptotic utilitarianism in scoring rules. Social Choice and Welfare, 47(2), 431–458. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-016-0971-2
- Saari, D. G. (2008). Disposing dictators, demystifying voting paradoxes. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 48(9-10), 1671–1673. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2008.05.016
- Sinopoli, F. D. (2000). Sophisticated voting and equilibrium refinements under plurality rule. Social Choice and Welfare, 17(4), 655–672. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s003550000049
- Valdini, M. E., & Lewis-Beck, M. S. (2018). Economic voting in Latin America: Rules and responsibility. American Journal of Political Science, 62(2), 410–423. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12339
- Weiszfeld, E., & Plastria, F. (2009). On the point for which the sum of the distances to n given points is minimum. Annals of Operations Research, 167(1), 7–41. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-008-0352-z
- Zwicker, W. S. (2008). A characterization of the rational mean neat voting rules. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 48(9), 1374–1384. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2008.05.029