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


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, access via your institution.


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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

  18. 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



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


  • Weak Link
  • Directed Cycle
  • Election Method
  • Strict Partial Order
  • Strong Path