English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

In this paper, we experimentally compare major approval-based  multiwinner voting rules. To this end, we define a measure of  similarity between two equal-sized committees subject to a given  election. Using synthetic elections coming from several  distributions, we analyze how similar are the committees provided by  prominent voting rules. Our results can be visualized as ``maps of  voting rules'', which provide a counterpoint to a purely axiomatic  classification of voting rules.  The strength of our proposed method is its independence from preimposedclassifications (such as the satisfaction of concrete axioms),  and that it indeed offers a much finer distinction than  the current state of axiomatic analysis.

An Experimental Comparison of Multiwinner Voting Rules on Approval Elections