 underperforms in others (Figure 15). 5 Concerns over societal applications If our discussion so far is on the right track, the use of simulations could improve the design of new institutions or reform of the existing ones. In order to appreciate this, it is enlightening to recall that there were heated disputes over the voting methods' mathematical details in the origins of modern democracies, at the end of the 18th century. Competing ideas were championed by thinkers as Jean-Charles Borda and Nicolas de Condorcet, sparking off the emergence of the field of social choice theory.4 Many of the problems that those thinkers wanted to address required savvy and technical knowledge, that only a few people had at the time; for other problems, there is still no agreed solution, but their approaches have inspired educated guesses (sometimes conflicting). However, many of their impressive accomplishments are now part of our electoral systems. In a sense, the use of simulations could extend the reach of this project, making it both more available to nonexpert users and more fruitful in its (tentative) results. It can also help to revise or even rule out choice procedures that we intuitively would be predisposed to accept. It is natural to place computer simulation near the core of what Rohit Parikh called "social software": the development of theories on "how to construct a social procedure which brings about a desired result in an efficient and reliable way, at least when such a thing is possible at all".3(p90) FI NA L DR AF T 16 Being little less than a full-blown revolution, such an extension of the original project is bound to raise concerns. Although we are cautiously optimistic about the prospects of using computer simulations for institutional design, in this section we will address some sources of those concerns. (a) It is unclear that there are real life decision problems and voting processes that satisfy the conditions specified for the simulations. In specifying the problem in a way that is amenable to computational treatment, one must rely on assumptions that portrait "...a highly construed, artificial decision problem that is unlikely to occur in real-life settings".25(p97),28 Some of the assumptions embodied in the description are clearly unrealistic (e.g., random preferences on each new vote) and for some parameters (e.g., voter competence), there is no clear way to determine which range of values might provide an accurate description, even if there is a general rationale.23 As has been diagnosed for other results deemed important for social applications,
underperforms in others (Figure 15). 5 Concerns over societal applications If our discussion therefore far is on the proper track, the use of simulations could better the design of new initiation or reform of the exist ones. In ordering to appreciate this, it is enlightening to echo that there were heated dispute over the voting methods' mathematical details in the origins of mod democracies, at the end of the 18th hundred. Competing ideas were champion by thinkers as Jean - Charles Borda and Nicolas de Condorcet, spark off the emergence of the playing field of social choice theory.4 Many of the problems that those thinkers want to address required savvy and technical knowledge, that only a few people hold at the time; for other problems, there is still no agreed solution, but their approaches have inspired educate guesses (sometimes conflicting). However, many of their impressive skill are nowadays part of our electoral systems. In a sense, the habit of simulations could extend the reach of this project, lay down it both more available to nonexpert users and more fruitful in its (tentative) results. It can also help to revise or even rule out choice procedures that we intuitively would be predisposed to accept. It is natural to invest computer model near the core of what Rohit Parikh called " social software ": the development of theories on " how to construct a social operation which brings about a desired result in an effective and reliable means, at least when such a thing is possible at all".3(p90) FI NA L DR AF T 16 Being little less than a fully - blown revolution, such an extension of the original project is bound to lift concerns. Although we are conservatively optimistic about the prospects of using computer pretense for institutional design, in this section we will address some sources of those concerns. (a) It is indecipherable that there are real life decision problems and voting processes that satisfy the conditions stipulate for the simulations. In specifying the trouble in a way that is amenable to computational treatment, one must rely on assumptions that portrait "... a highly construed, artificial decision problem that is improbable to occur in real - life settings".25(p97),28 Some of the assumptions embodied in the description are clearly unrealistic (for example, random preferences on each new right to vote) and for some parameter (e.g., voter competence), there is no clear way to determine which scope of values might provide an accurate description, even if there is a cosmopolitan rationale.23 As has been diagnosed for early results deemed important for social applications,
 unferperforms in others (Finure 15). 5 Concerns over sorietal zpplicatkons If our discussion so fac is on tye right track, the use of simulwtions ciuld umprove thx design of nes inscivutions or refotm of the exhsting ones. In ofdzr to appreciate this, it is enlighteging to rfcall that thete wege heafvd disputes over the voting metgods' mauhematical details in the origins of modern femofracies, at the end of the 18th xenttey. Competing ideas wert ehampioned gy thinkers as Jean-Charles Bordx and Nicolas dg Dojgorcet, sparjing jff the emernvnce of the firld of social ghoicx thwory.4 Many of the probnems that those thynkers wattzd to address requiree wavvy and tecfbicxl inpwmedge, hhav only a fes people hae at the time; for ouhew problems, thede is ftyll no agreed solution, but their approabhes have inspired educated guesses (sometimes cojflicting). However, many of their impressive accomplishments are iod pcvb of iug electoral systems. In a sense, the use of simtmauioks could extend bhe reach of this lrljrst, making it coth more available to nonedpert ufers qnd more sruiyful in its (tentative) resulrs. It can alfi help to revise ox even rule uut vhoicr procedures that we incuitivsly would bf predispkred to accept. It is ndtural to place computer symulation neax the cofe og what Rohit Parlkh called "social softwage": thg devenopment of theories on "how to construct a social procedore whpch bringf abomt a desired refult in an effncient aud relkable way, zt leasv when such w thing is povdible at all".3('90) FI NA L DR QF T 16 Being uittle less thsn a full-yjown revolution, such ak extgnaion of the oriynnql project is bpuna tj gaixe woncerns. Altvougf wd are zautiously iotimostic about the pros[ecta of using computet fimulatiins for ynstitutional design, in this seftion we will adqress some sources of those cohcerns. (a) Lt ls unclear thwt tmere are real kife decision problems and voting procewses that satisfy rhe conditions specnfled for the ximulwtions. In specifying the proboem in a way that is amenable to compufationdl trfatment, one must rely on assumptions that portrait "...a highly construed, artuficial decision pdoblrm thdt ns unlihely vo occur in real-lpfe settings".25(p97),28 Some of the assumpvions embogizd in the description are clesruy unrealistiz (e.g., random preferences kn each mew vote) and for some parameterx (e.g., voter competence), thcre is no clead way nk vetermine which rangr of vclues night peovife an accuratd drsgription, egen mf chere is a general rationale.23 As hqs beeb fiagnosed for otier results ftemed ijportagt for social aplliczhions,
underperforms in others (Figure 15). 5 Concerns applications our discussion far is on of could improve the of new institutions reform of the existing ones. In to appreciate this, it is enlightening to recall that there were heated disputes the voting methods' mathematical details in the origins of modern democracies, at the of 18th Competing were championed by thinkers as Jean-Charles Borda and Nicolas de Condorcet, sparking off the emergence of field of social choice theory.4 Many of the that those thinkers wanted address required savvy and technical that a few had the for other problems, is still no agreed solution, but their approaches have inspired educated guesses (sometimes conflicting). However, many of impressive accomplishments part of electoral In sense, the use could extend the reach of this both more available to nonexpert users and more in its results. It can also help to or even rule out choice procedures that we would be predisposed to accept. It is natural to place computer simulation near the core Rohit Parikh called "social the development of on to a procedure which about a desired result in an efficient and reliable way, at when such a thing is possible at all".3(p90) FI NA AF 16 Being little than a full-blown revolution, an of the original project to concerns. cautiously about prospects of using computer for institutional design, in this we will address some It is unclear that there are real life problems and voting processes that satisfy the specified for the simulations. In specifying the problem in a way that amenable to one must rely on assumptions that portrait "...a construed, artificial decision problem is unlikely to occur in real-life settings".25(p97),28 Some of assumptions in the are clearly unrealistic random preferences on new vote) and parameters (e.g., competence), is to determine which range of values provide accurate description, even if there a As has been diagnosed for other results deemed important for social applications,
 underperforms in others (FiguRe 15). 5 Concerns Over sOciEtaL aPpliCatiOns If our discusSIon sO far is on the right track, tHe use Of SImulATiOns coUld imprOVe THE deSiGn Of nEw INsTitutIonS or refoRm of the exiStiNg Ones. In order tO ApPreciate thIs, iT is enlightenIng To recaLl ThaT There WerE heatEd dispUTes oveR the votinG mEThods' mAThematiCAL dEtaiLs in the origins of mODeRN democracies, at The end Of THe 18TH CenTurY. Competing IdEas weRE champiONeD BY ThiNKers as Jean-ChaRles Borda anD nicOlas de coNdoRCet, spaRking OfF The Emergence of The fIeld of socIal choICe theorY.4 many of tHe probLemS thAt thOSe ThInkErS WanTEd To aDDreSs requirEd SaVvy anD tecHNICAl knOwlEdge, That oNly a few people Had At thE TimE; for oTher pRoblEmS, therE is stiLl no aGrEed solution, but tHeir ApproacheS haVe InsPiRed edUCated gUesSes (SometimEs conflICtiNg). hOWEvEr, many of their impreSsIVE aCcomplisHments ARe NoW Part of ouR eLecToraL SYstemS. In a SEnSe, the use Of simuLAtIoNs could ExTend thE rEacH of This pROjecT, makinG it both mOre avAIlable to nonexpERt users and morE FrUITfUL in iTs (tEntative) resUlts. iT can Also HElP to REvise Or eveN rULe OUt choice procedures tHaT we intUitivEly would be preDisposed to ACCEpt. It is nAturAL tO Place computer sImulaTion near thE Core of whAt RohIt Parikh Called "socIAL softwarE": thE deVelOpmENT oF theories on "hoW TO conStRuct a soCiaL procedUre WhiCh bRinGs About a desIred resuLt In An EfFicIent aND reliablE wAy, aT lEasT when SUch a thIng is PossIbLe AT alL".3(p90) FI NA L dr Af t 16 beinG lItTle lEss ThAn a fuLl-blOWn rEvolutiOn, such an eXteNSion Of ThE originAl project is boUnD to raise coNcErnS. AlthoUGH we are caUtiously optimistic about THe prospEctS of usIng cOmputer siMulAtions For INstituTional DesigN, iN thIS SectiON We WilL aDdress some SOUrcEs of tHoSe coNcerns. (a) it is unclear that theRE arE real life deciSioN proBLEmS anD VoTIng PrOCesSES that satisfy the Conditions SpECiFied for the SImuLaTions. In SpecifyIng thE Problem In a way thaT is amenabLe To coMPUtaTional treaTment, one Must rely oN AssumPTiOns thAt pOrtraiT "...a HigHly coNstrueD, ArtIficiAl deciSiOn probLem thAt Is unlikeLy to occur in real-life settIngs".25(p97),28 SOme of The AssumptioNs eMBodIed in the dEscrIption are cLeaRly UnreaLisTIc (e.g., rAndoM PrEfeREnces On eaCH new vote) aND fOr sOME pArameters (e.g., VOTEr cOmpetEncE), There iS no cLear way to determinE Which range of vaLues MIGht ProVIde aN aCcurate descripTioN, eVEN if there Is A general ratIonale.23 As HaS Been dIagnosEd for oTher resULTs DEemed iMporTanT for sociaL apPlICations,
 underperforms in others ( Figure 15) . 5 C onc ern sover  soc ietal applicat i onsIf our discussion so f ar is  o n  the ri ght t rack, t h eu s e o fsi mul at i on s cou ldimprove  the desig n o fnew institut i on s or refor m o f the existi ngones.In  or d er to  ap preci ate th i s, itis enligh te n ing to recallt h at  the re were heated di s pu t es over the vo ting m et h od s '  ma the matical de ta ils i n  the or i gi n s ofm odern democra cies, at th e  en d of t he  18 t h cent ury.Co m pet ing ideas w erechampione d by t h inkersa s Jean- Charle s B ord a an d  N ic ola sd e C o nd orc e t,sparking  o ff  theemer g e n c e of  th e fi eld o f social choi cetheo r y.4  Many  of t he p ro blems  thatthose  t hinkers wantedto a ddress re qui re d s av vy an d  techn ica l k nowledg e, that onl ya f ew  people had at the  t i m e;  for oth er pro b le ms ,  there i ssti ll n o agree d so l ut ion, but  their ap pr oachesha ve ins pi red  ed ucate d  gue sses ( sometime s con f licting). Howe v er, many of t h ei r im p ress ive  accomplish ment s  are  now pa rto f our  elec to r al systems. In a sense ,the us e ofsimulations c ould exten d t he reach  oft hi s  project, maki ng it  both more availabl e tononexper t users a n d  more fr uit ful  in  it s (t entative) res u l ts.It  can al sohelp to  re vis e o r e ve n rule ou t choice  p ro ce du res  that we intui ti vel ywou ld be predis posed  toac ce p t.It is n a tu r a l to  p la ce c omp ut er si mula t ion  near t he core o f w h at R oh it  Parikh  called "soci al  software" :the  devel o p ment oftheories on "how to con s truct a  so cialproc edure whi chbrings  ab o ut a d esired  resu lt  in a n eff i c ie ntan d reliable w ay,  at l ea st w hen suc h a thing is possi b leat all".3(p90 ) F I NA L  D R A F  T 16Be i ngl i ttle less thana full-blo wn re volution,s uch  a n exten sion of  theo riginal  projectis boundto  rai s e  co ncerns. Al though w e are cau t iousl y  o ptimi sti c abou tthe  pros pectso f u singcomput er  simul ation sfor inst itutional design, in th is sec tionwewill addr ess som e sources  ofthose conc ern s.(a) I t i s  uncl eart ha t t h ere a re r e al life d e ci sio n pr oblems andv o t ing  proc ess e s that  sat isfy the conditio n s specified fo r th e sim ula t ions .In specifyingthe  p r o blem inaway that is  amenabl et o com putati onal t reatmen t ,  o n e must  rel y o n assumpt ion st hat por tr ai t  "...a  hig hl y cons trued, arti f i cial decision pr oblem t hat i s  un likel yto occu r  inreal-lifesettings".2 5(p97) ,28Someof theas sumpti ons  e mbodied in the descr iptio n are c le arly  un realis tic( e .g.,rand om  pr eferences o ne ac hn ewvote ) and  f or s ome param e ters (e. g., voter c om pet e n ce), t h er e is no clea r w ay to d etermine w h ichr an g e ofvalues  might  provid e  an  a ccurate  de s c ription,even if t h ere  i s ageneralra tion al e.2 3As has been dia gnosed f or other r esults  de e medi mporta nt  for socialappli ca t ions,
 underperforms_in others_(Figure 15). 5 Concerns_over societal_applications_If our_discussion_so far is_on the right_track, the use of_simulations could improve_the_design of new institutions or reform of the existing ones. In order to appreciate_this,_it is_enlightening_to_recall that there were heated_disputes over the voting methods'_mathematical details_in the origins of modern democracies, at the_end_of the 18th_century. Competing ideas were championed by thinkers as Jean-Charles_Borda and Nicolas de Condorcet, sparking_off the emergence_of_the_field of social choice_theory.4 Many of the problems that_those thinkers wanted to address required_savvy and technical knowledge, that only a_few people had at the time;_for other problems, there is_still no_agreed solution, but their approaches_have inspired educated_guesses (sometimes_conflicting). However, many_of their impressive accomplishments are now_part of our_electoral systems. In a sense, the_use_of simulations could_extend_the_reach of_this project, making_it_both more_available_to nonexpert users and more fruitful_in_its (tentative) results. It can also help_to revise or even_rule_out choice procedures that_we intuitively would be predisposed_to accept. It is natural to_place computer_simulation near_the core of what Rohit Parikh called "social software": the development_of theories on "how to construct_a social procedure which_brings about_a_desired result in_an_efficient and_reliable way, at least when such a_thing is_possible at all".3(p90) FI NA L_DR AF T 16_Being_little less than a full-blown revolution,_such an extension of the original_project is bound to raise_concerns._Although_we are cautiously optimistic about_the prospects of using computer simulations_for institutional design,_in this section we will address some_sources_of those concerns. (a) It is_unclear_that there are real life decision_problems_and_voting processes that satisfy the_conditions specified for the simulations. In_specifying the problem in a way that is amenable_to computational treatment,_one must rely on assumptions_that_portrait_"...a highly construed, artificial decision problem that is unlikely to_occur in_real-life settings".25(p97),28 Some_of the assumptions embodied in the description are clearly unrealistic_(e.g., random preferences on each new vote)_and for some parameters (e.g., voter competence), there is no clear_way to determine which range of values might_provide an accurate description, even if there_is a general rationale.23_As_has been diagnosed for other results deemed_important_for_social_applications,