Skip to main content
Log in

The probability of ties with scoring methods: Some results

  • Published:
Social Choice and Welfare Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract.

The main flaw of the Condorcet method is that a Condorcet winner does not always exist (when there is a top cycle). Moreover, in some cases, all candidates are contained in one cycle and, therefore, a society or committee using the Condorcet method risks to face a severe indeterminacy. An indeterminacy can also happen when using other methods: for example the Borda method, plurality voting or any scoring method; but the origin of the indeterminacy is completely different. It happens when all candidates are tied. We study the probability that all candidates are tied when using a scoring method. We show that it is equivalent to some random walk problems. Some analytical and numerical results show that, under the assumptions underlying our study, the probability is very small and decreases when the number of voters or candidates increases.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Received: 18 December 1998/Accepted: 17 March 2000

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Marchant, T. The probability of ties with scoring methods: Some results. Soc Choice Welfare 18, 709–735 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/s003550000078

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s003550000078

Keywords

Navigation