Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Comments on Strange behavior in elections and pie charts

Parent

Strange behavior in elections and pie charts

+2
−1

So, a friend asked me the probability for a candidate to get at least 50% of the total votes in an election consisting of 5 candidates (let's pretend everyone picks at random 🙂). I thought for a bit and then presented an answer:

Let's first generalize so that the election has $n$ candidates.

We can think of the votes cast between candidates as a pie chart with $n$ slices and $n$ borders. We draw one fixed border from the center to the top, and then draw $n-1$ more with randomized positions in the chart. Furthermore, let's say the chart shows the votes acquired by candidate 1, candidate 2, etc from the top going clockwise. Illustration Now, the probability of the first candidate getting $\geq50\%$ of all votes (shaded area) is equivalent to the probability of all $n-1$ lines being on the unshaded side of the disk, which is $\left(\frac12\right)^{n-1}$.

Since this probability should be the same for every candidate, the overall probability of someone getting at least half of all votes cast is $n\cdot\left(\frac12\right)^{n-1}=\frac n{2^{n-1}}$.

I found with some coding that for my pie chart analogy of the problem, this is indeed correct (yeay!).

However, for the original problem... I was absolutely wrong! With some coding (again), I found out that the actual probability is very close to, if not $\frac1{(n-1)!}=\frac n{n!}$.

Why's that? I'm certain it's because the two behave differently, but if that's so I don't get why they do.

What causes this behavior? Has this problem been studied before, and is this perhaps a branch of probability theory?

Thanks in advance!

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

0 comment threads

Post
+0
−1

My approach is, I suppose, simpler.

There are 4 voters: A, B, C, D. They vote randomly

There are 4 candidates vying for A, B, C, D's attention. Let's call them W, X, Y, Z

How many different possible electorate results are there?

1 candidate gets all 4 votes: $^4C_1 = 4$
1 candidate gets 3 votes: $^4C_1 \times ^3C_1 = 12$
1 candidate gets 2 votes (half the votes): $^4C_1(^3C_1 + ^3C_2) = 24$
All candidates get 1 vote each: $^4C_4 = 1$

Total = $4 + 12 + 24 + 1 = 41$

Probability that one candidate gets at least 50% of the votes = $P(50\%)$

$P(50\%) = \frac{40}{41}$

I don't know how to generalize this "finding" though. What I can perhaps say that I know is the electorate is going to be myriad and the candidates, comparatively few.

How does that affect the probability? Feels very tower of Hanoish and I don't have what it takes to solve that problem.

Side quest: Despite the fact that this is a discrete distribution (1 or 2 votes, not 1.5 votes), the OP has chosen a continuous model (area). Does the fact that the answer is in combinatorics form, $\frac{n!}{(n - 1)!}$ mean anything?

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

1 comment thread

The case analysis needs to take into account the possibility of a 2-2-0-0 split. If there are 4 voter... (1 comment)
The case analysis needs to take into account the possibility of a 2-2-0-0 split. If there are 4 voter...
Peter Taylor‭ wrote 4 months ago

The case analysis needs to take into account the possibility of a 2-2-0-0 split. If there are 4 voters and 4 candidates then there are $4^4 = 64$ ways for them to vote.