Skip to main content
Log in

A new monotonic, clone-independent, reversal symmetric, and condorcet-consistent single-winner election method

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

Abstract

In recent years, the Pirate Party of Sweden, the Wikimedia Foundation, the Debian project, the “Software in the Public Interest” project, the Gentoo project, and many other private organizations adopted a new single-winner election method for internal elections and referendums. In this article, we will introduce this method, demonstrate that it satisfies, e.g., resolvability, Condorcet, Pareto, reversal symmetry, monotonicity, and independence of clones and present an O(C^3) algorithm to calculate the winner, where C is the number of alternatives.

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

References

  • Arrow KJ, Raynaud H (1986) Social choice and multicriterion decision-making. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Börgers C (2009) Mathematics of social choice: voting, compensation, and division. SIAM, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  • Camps R, Mora X, Saumell L (2008) A continuous rating method for preferential voting. Working paper

  • Fishburn PC (1977) Condorcet social choice functions. SIAM J Appl Math 33: 469–489

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Floyd RW (1962) Algorithm 97 (Shortest Path). Commun ACM 5: 345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kopfermann K (1991) Mathematische Aspekte der Wahlverfahren. BI-Verlag, Mannheim

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin J, Nalebuff B (1995) An introduction to vote-counting schemes. J Econ Perspect 9: 3–26

    Google Scholar 

  • McCaffrey JD (2008) Test run: group determination in software testing. MSDN Magazine, Redmond, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Moulin H (1988) Condorcet’s principle implies the no show paradox. J Econ Theory 45: 53–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nurmi HJ (1987) Comparing voting systems. Springer-Verlag, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Rivest RL, Shen E (2010) An optimal single-winner preferential voting system based on game theory. Working paper

  • Saari DG (1994) Geometry of voting. Springer-Verlag, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith JH (1973) Aggregation of preferences with variable electorate. Econometrica 41: 1027–1041

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl S, Johnson PE (2006) Understanding modern mathematics. Jones & Bartlett Publishing, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Tideman TN (1987) Independence of clones as a criterion for voting rules. Soc Choice Welf 4: 185–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tideman TN (2006) Collective decisions and voting: the potential for public choice. Ashgate Publishing, Burlington

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright B (2009) Objective measures of preferential ballot voting systems. Doctoral dissertation, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina

  • Yue A, Liu W, Hunter A (2007) Approaches to constructing a stratified merged knowledge base. Symbolic and quantitative approaches to reasoning with uncertainty, 9th European Conference, ECSQARU 2007

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Markus Schulze.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schulze, M. A new monotonic, clone-independent, reversal symmetric, and condorcet-consistent single-winner election method. Soc Choice Welf 36, 267–303 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-010-0475-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-010-0475-4

Keywords

Navigation