Correction of selection errors by the method of usage of elector voice weighed estimate

I was an emperor, and Kikeriks leader of the masses. He overthrew me from the throne in five minutes by turning on a strong charisma. In vain I tried to stop him by edicts, and seeing that something was wrong, made a crucial mistake by lowering taxes. Theory ought to be known.

Ah, all that nearsighted scum – Corbusier, Mondrian, Gropius – who mutilated the world more effectively than any Luftwaffe!

Slightly paraphrasing Brodsky, we can say that we live in a time of complete and final victory of ideas of Montesquieu that have disfigured the world, multiplied by the inveterate liberalism, when the separation of powers, universal, equal and secret suffrage and other unimaginable for adequate management postulates have become a quite dangerous commonplace. All the more dangerous because for ignoring these postulates one can "get his ass kicked in full" from the Boss, and the literal fulfillment of the democratic demands will inevitably lead to the degradation of any state.

Since it is necessary either to accept these statements as conditions of the problem, or reject it, let us try to give a simple argument to the above.

We assume that a truly democratic government with the need to make critical decisions by the entire highly variable human mass akin to the use of untrained soldiers on a battlefield, thereat the soldiers, who choose their command. Such an army has a tendency to lose everything that is possible, and is the complete opposite to Suvorov's soldiers, who were not only trained, not only knew "their maneuver", but also understood, in general terms, the concept of operation. Fine, though tragic example is the choice of factory directors by workers, what was popular at the end of the monstrous by consequences Gorbachev's "perestroika". In history there are lots of illustrations showing that every experience of a truly democratic government inevitably leads to the same dismal results.

However, democracies not only exist, but also occupy a leading position in the global economy, and exert the political and military dictate to "rogue states", i.e. states, "democracy" of which is in doubt. This fact is taken virtually "on faith" and is so commonplace that even discussing it is akin to "the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost".

However, we can try to take a chance to express a simple idea: successful states do not use the principles of Montesquieu in real governing. Moreover, they are only declared, but the management - the system of choice of leading cadres, for example, is provided by either the mechanisms of manipulation, or parametric methods, and more often and most successfully - in both ways at the same time. Thus, even a cursory glance at the electoral system of the Empire of Good allows us to deservedly appreciate both the role of the "electoral college" and the value of the information pressure and rotation of the political forces that do not differ in goals and objectives. It is clear that the "electorate" there solves little. But only provides a choice of more charismatic president of two identical ones.

At the same time, the only survived empire keeps a wary eye on the strict implementation of the principles of equal suffrage in the defeated ex-Soviet states. And if satrapies like the peripheral fragments of the USSR interest it only as aggressive anti-Russian bastards, who make periodically color revolutions for the final degradation of the economy and permanent humanitarian catastrophe, then Anglo-Saxons are extremely concerned about Russia. It is clear that nuclear power, still capable with one shot to wipe out half of any continent, will not be left alone. Especially - power, more recently, bringing terror to the whole Protestant army, and still allowing itself a certain dissent and partial tolerance to the "universal human values".

But the once mighty, and not so weak even now, Russia has fallen into a determined process, leading to a narrowing of the space of solutions - the necessity of democratic governance, which for her is not suitable at all. Since in our country (neopatriots, please allow me to use that expression as a former citizen of the USSR, and now a "natsman" in "independent" state) "democratic" management methods work particularly disgusting and result in a short time in revolt, traditionally "senseless and merciless" and then - in pretty mass graves. It is clear that the stupidity of the "Asiatic", wild and bloodthirsty Russians with an organic necessity in a cruel king, with bears, vodka and immutable Kalashnikov, not even worth mentioning. You just need to take into account that the complexity and diversity of Russian people rule out effective management by any ochlocratic methods.

At present, the current government has almost exhausted the resource of confidence caused by sedation and normalization after mad nineties. Plus the generation has grown of "young, unknown," who howls again: "We are waiting for changes", plus the continuing improvement of information viruses "memes", plus the development of the experience of "color revolutions", plus rotting of self-indulging and irresponsible power... In short: we must do something. New challenges cannot be ignored, otherwise miracles can come from the most unexpected side where "Iskanders", "Yars" and "Liners" (rocket complexes), with all their magnificent performance characteristics cannot defend.

You need to win (i.e. at least not completely lose) the psychological warfare, no doubt, but also it would be nice to turn in your favor the result of imposed democratic "grassroots democracy".

However, suffering about the fate of Russia, even more, in the evening, even more so - in the kitchen, especially – by people, having no relation to public administration, represent an easy option of mental disorder and is subject to termination for reasons of conservation of mental health. Therefore, we consider only the abstract problem of countering the efforts of the foe, and state the following incident:

Let us consider the current situation with "lifting" candidates for elective positions. We believe that the universal, equal and secret suffrage is performed, and the role of falsification and manipulation is small (contrary to the liberal screeching, this statement is not far from the truth). Let us specify the limits for the voter. For example, disability or severe mental illness, etc. should not concern us because of their minor contribution to the overall result (percentage of such people is small). But the age limit is the only total restriction, which, we note, no one has ever challenged. And even the Empire of Good does not require that in the curated states vote crib babies, politically literate individuals of pre-teen age or beer adolescents. That is, the weight Heaviside function is introduced for the voter, where the weight of the vote before the adulthood is zero, and the weight after the age of majority abruptly turns into the unit and is assigned for life. And it is extremely foolish for the state in which the vote is made, and extremely beneficial for every distributor of the "color" revolution infection.

Let us explain this on simple examples.

Online gamer Mitenka, who recently crossed his 16-year anniversary, adores candidate Nikita Venal and his party "Rebellion”. They promise him a lot of computers, popcorn, free Internet, and the prospect of haring off to the West from "bitchy Russia" and get, there in the West, all conceivable by Mitenka goods, plus an ocean yacht for beautiful eyes into the bargain.

Serge will be delighted by Victor Con, the leader of the party "Smack Schmuck". Of course, Serge required the strong hand of a strong personality for entry into the sweetest organization of storm-troopers. And then he will become strong, and no one would dare to offend him.

Tanyushka, not particularly faffing around political programs, will choose the most beautiful candidate and instantly forget about it.

Etc. etc. And so the voice of each of these guys weighs as much as the voice of a grizzled in diplomatic battles wolf or the voice of a developer of missile technology, not to mention the voices of professional politicians who know very well the price of Nikita and Victor.

Ravings? Absolutely! Costs of "democratic" control method, seven coffins its origin in the mind.

So, let us define an abnormal (relatively to the required trend of development of the country) vote as a failure. A typical failure of a system element with not absolute reliability. And the density of the probability of failure (in our case - the wrong ballot) is determined by the U-shaped function of the failure rate ( http://www.obzh.ru/nad/4-3.html, in Russian).

Taking into account the fact that this curve is universal and can be applied to any system of unreliable elements (absolutely reliable ones the nature is not yet invented), we can extend it to the prediction of the reliability of the voters. That is, there is a high degree of probability that the choice of 30 ... 50-year-old voters would be more appropriate than that of 18-year-olds, or, say, 80-year-olds. Of course, if you use the weight function of "voice price", representing the inverted curve of the failure rate, we obtain a version of matched filter and thus will minimize the noise contribution, i.e. ill-conceived and non-professional evaluations.

Intuitively: whether adult, accomplished people who have children, occupation, experience and more or less decent health, are more appropriate in evaluations than 18-year-old youths or antediluvians? Sure.

It might look like this: a voter, who for the first time due to the young age came to the voting place attain the voting weight of, say, +0.05. A middle-aged father of a family who has a permanent place of work and profession - +0.7. A professional politician who knows the candidates inside out, - +0.9, etc. However, we are getting ahead and introduced the dependence of the vote weight from the criteria not related to age.

Let us return to the comparison of the weight functions of voters (Fig. 3).

It is obvious now that the existing state of affairs, that is, the use of the Heaviside function with a "zero" at the start of voting age provides unreasonably large contribution of the "noise" in the form of ill-considered decisions of voters who are not very useful in this case. And well, if it's just "noise”. Much worse if it would be a "meme", i.e. the embedded from outside or home information virus. In this case, the candidates who influenced the unconscious choice of young people will have the result in the form of, say, n%. And the candidates who addressed to the memories of the beautiful past ("Do not say: “Why the former days were better than these?”, because not from wisdom you ask about this"), will receive m% of voters, mainly due to the elderly, who no longer able to accept the new.

And if at the elections the function of reliability of voters is used, i.e. the inverted curve of the failure rate, Nikita Venal and Victor Con, who addressed mainly to the immature minds of young people, will receive significantly lower results. That is, instead of n% of votes they receive weight К*n, which in the percentage of the weight of all votes will be significantly less than n%. The interference signal rejection will be provided by the value of K, defined as the ratio of the integrals of functions ranging from the minimum voting age to point t1.

The same thing will happen with the party "Dotage forever". Instead of m% of votes in the previous version it will receive K1*m.

What it might look like organizationally? If we want to improve the "quality" of the voter, we need to gather about him a certain amount of information (with his consent, of course). Age, occupation, family, criminal record, drugs, belief in flying saucers, devoutly religious, treatment in a psychiatric hospital - none of these parameters will be superfluous. After collecting the data, they will be sent to a central computer, which will calculate the weight of the electoral vote of this person (this coefficient will remain secret) and assign an identification code to be used in all subsequent votes of this voter.

It is clear that, according to the central limit theorem (http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution) weights of voters will be distributed in the population according to the normal law, with the mathematical expectation of the Gaussian distribution being a half of the electoral vote weight.

This would mean that the preliminary work to determine the weight of electoral votes has been made correctly, otherwise you have to remove "distortions" in assessing the "quality of the voters”.

As a result, the universal and equal suffrage by secret ballot will be modified to the public, potentially equal and secret one. Potentially because of by increasing his/her skills, leading acceptable to the community way of life, any voter can potentially reach the limit coefficient of 1.0, and in this he/she will not be hampered by any property qualification, no origin or belonging or not belonging to the upper class.

As a result, the government resistance to adverse foreign information influences will increase proportionally to the assessment quality of the voter. The more correct is held this estimate, the more accurately the power understands what it needs to modify and develop the state, the better are the results. The "democratic" principle formally not suffers, and will be really useful for the society and the state.

But Nikita Venal and Victor Con still will get some electoral resource. Despite the fact that they intentionally or unintentionally used a manipulation, addressing to immature, unformed as a result of life experience psychological reactions of the voter. And this should be considered as disadvantage of the proposed model. In the language of radio engineering such an effect can be defined as incomplete rejection of the interference signal. And if you analyze the weight coefficients applied by us, it becomes obvious that we could not obtain the complete rejection because we did not use negative coefficients in the construction of a non-recursive filter. And for more complete filtration coefficients must be used, with a value less than zero.

Indeed, why the vote weight of some voter cannot be negative? If, say, he is after five prison terms and three suicide attempts continues to use hard drugs, has no job, is seen in hooliganism, looting during the riots, corrupting minors, trying to organize a gang, etc. etc. And has thereat no profession, has not worked a single day in his life, and the willingness to sell the Motherland is "painted on his face”.

Or, suppose that this is not so monstrous figure, but simply a man, a genius to make wrong decisions, as a result of which he lost his family, work, house, and holes up a little. And it is highly likely that he will make a wrong choice when voting. And we cannot deprive him of his right to vote.

But if he has a negative weight coefficient, then - welcome to vote! Inversion of his choice will enable us to convert the defect of "universal" suffrage in a useful result. His voice will be as valuable and important as the voice of the expert with a clear idea of the consequences of the choice of various political forces.

So, let the mathematical expectation of all weights of voters be equal to zero, i.e. voters can have both positive and negative weights assigned to the vote. (Note that the same result can be obtained a posteriori from the voting data according to the previous version without changing the weights of votes by simply entering a negative constant component and subsequent doubling of the result, Figure 5).

In this case, the results of voting for a particular political party, candidate, etc. can be either positive or negative. That is, for example, the party, for which voted voters with predominantly negative voice weight will also receive a negative result. Or, say, all parties received a negative result, which clearly indicates that their policies and programs do not meet the requirements of the voters responsible in their choice, and "something needs to be changed in the conservatory".

But the most important result of using such weighted sum of electoral preferences would be virtually complete rejection of external destructive influences. Unless the foe has succeeded to create such unthinkable information virus, which infects humans with high level of reasonable criticism and at the same time does not act on persons with high suggestibility and low resistance to external information influences.

An interesting side effect of the proposed filtering will be the reduction of the contribution of the majority of voters that always hinders the development of society as a result of the rigidity of their opinions, and persistence with which they treat all new.

Of course, in order not to tease dogs and turn up under the fire from liberalistic critics, we must still keep the weight coefficients of the vote in the range 0 ... 1. It is psychologically more acceptable and in everyday terms more clear: you have a higher education - plus 0.1 points, had criminal charges - minus 0.1, etc. But then we must recalculate the index taking into account the subtraction of the value of mathematical expectation and subsequent doubling of the result.

Let us formulate the intermediate conclusion. By means of the coefficient, which is a function of several variables describing the human qualities of the voter, we can obtain a balanced assessment of the election results. It should be mentioned that the synthesis of such a function is a particular challenge because the final coefficient will be calculated taking into account both additive components and multipliers, such as the dependence of the voter qualities from his/her age. But after a correct calculation of the weight function of the voter’s vote by using the proposed method, we can provide:

And in the end a little amateurish sketch of the post-Soviet states in the "family way".

Those at the top self-indulge, those on the bottom became slightly (but only slightly) hungry as a result of, say, a fall in exports, or (equivalently) became insolent due to received but unearned money, and "want strange". Appeared speeches, parliamentary scandals, multiple psychics, favorable mortgage, seers, prophets, and - opposition figures with open faces, breathing nobility. Media viruses crap, TV finally gone crazy and continuously broadcasts of the charm of living in the developed democracies and monstrous domestic "gore". Sleaze pours by garbage flows, all public people are in this substrate, and one cannot wash off. The Black Hundred invigorates by permissible anti-Semitism, determined young people began to gather in flocks and with good intentions educate migrant workers. Old people let in whisperers and remember good old Beria. Office plankton boils, Internet hamsters are excited and face book intensively. "Bodies", slothful, battened and stupefied from the previous business-roof freebies, torture detainees already only for fun. The people become stupid from loans, mentions the current government only in the context of obscene. The smartest have long ago prepared skies and a place to store them.

And the elections are coming, the elections by "collective farm", where one person, regardless of his/her mind and morals - one vote. And London hermits predict. The world's media salivate in anticipation of fresh carrion. The Empire of Good frowns and sends a new ambassador. The power starts to rush, involuntarily emptying intestines and flirt with distraught mob.

But - too late. Probably, one had to think before. Anyway, the power in this period is so shameful that further description is akin to admired scrutiny of pornography.

However, the author was not born yesterday, I personally watched a color revolution in a mitigated by Ukrainian climate course of the disease, and fully understand all the impossibility of any changes in the electoral system of the state. Especially - Russian.

“Highly placed", as Tolstoy called, can they at least read an article about the benefits of weighted estimates in the analysis of large data sets? After all, public figures with private residences, for example, in Rublevka and real estate, for example, in Spain, have the hedonistic right to look favorably with regal benevolence on alarmists-beggars with their "Dostoevsky heroes" and "Priest-Avvakumov-ness". Social disasters they do not fear, hoping at another coup to join the winners. More often than not they manage to do it, but occasionally they still become skinned to the delight of plebs.

Therefore it is useless to offer the described in this paper method to the state, it can only be a firm or corporation that has not too much damped out the brains by financial lard. Large companies, we would like to think, also need to optimize the management.

Although all that might be useful for the Chinese? They have become much wiser after the unsurpassed by its anisotropy operation in Tiananmen Square.