Analysis of the Behavior and Reliability of Voting Systems Comprising Tri-State Units

Voting is a commonly used technique in combining results from peer experts. In distributed decision making systems, voting mechanisms are used to obtain a decision by incorporating the opinion of multiple units. Voting systems has many applications in fault tolerant systems, mutual exclusion in distributed systems, and replicated databases. We are specifically interested in voting systems as used in decision-making applications. The voting system studied in this paper consists of N units, each has three states: correct (success), wrong (failed), and abstain (did not produce an output). The final output of the decision-making (voting) system is correct if a consensus is reached on a correct unit output, abstain if all units abstain from voting, and wrong otherwise. In this paper, we describe a synthetic experimental procedure to study the behavior of voting systems using a simulator that we developed to: analyze the state of each expert, apply a voting mechanism, and analyze the voting results. For this analysis, we study the following behaviors of a voting system: 1) the reliability of the voting system, “R”; 2) the probability of reaching a consensus, “Pc”; 3) certainly index, “T”; and 4) the confidence index, ”C”. The configuration parameters controlling the analysis are: 1) the number of participating experts, “N”, 2) the possible output states of an expert, and 3) the probability distribution of each expert states. Results of this study unleash several behaviors of a decision-making system with tri-state experts as function of various configuration parameters.

[1]  Mostafa H. Ammar,et al.  Performance Characterization of Quorum-Consensus Algorithms for Replicated Data , 1989, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[2]  Gregory Levitin,et al.  Reliability optimization for weighted voting system , 2001, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[3]  A. Krzyżak,et al.  Methods of CombiningMultiple Classifiers and Their Application to Handwriting Recognition , 1992 .

[4]  Xiaofan Lin,et al.  Analysis of the Reliability and Behavior of Majority and Plurality Voting Systems , 2002 .

[5]  Gregory Levitin Analysis and optimization of weighted voting systems consisting of voting units with limited availability , 2001, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[6]  Behrooz Parhami,et al.  THRESHOLD VOTING IS FUNDAMENTALLY SIMPLER THAN PLURALITY VOTING , 1994 .

[7]  H ThomasRobert A Majority consensus approach to concurrency control for multiple copy databases , 1979 .

[8]  Ching Y. Suen,et al.  Application of majority voting to pattern recognition: an analysis of its behavior and performance , 1997, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A.

[9]  Ching Y. Suen,et al.  A theoretical analysis of the application of majority voting to pattern recognition , 1994, Proceedings of the 12th IAPR International Conference on Pattern Recognition, Vol. 3 - Conference C: Signal Processing (Cat. No.94CH3440-5).

[10]  Jehan-François Pâris,et al.  Voting with Witnesses: A Constistency Scheme for Replicated Files , 1986, ICDCS.

[11]  Hoang Pham,et al.  Weighted voting systems , 1999 .

[12]  B. Parhami Voting algorithms , 1994 .

[13]  Sargur N. Srihari,et al.  Decision Combination in Multiple Classifier Systems , 1994, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[14]  Dave E. Eckhardt,et al.  A theoretical investigation of generalized voters for redundant systems , 1989, [1989] The Nineteenth International Symposium on Fault-Tolerant Computing. Digest of Papers.