IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2606.02213.html

A New Method for Finding the Schulze Winner Set

Author

Listed:
  • Satoru Fujishige
  • Leo Goto
  • Satoshi Nakada

Abstract

We propose a new voting algorithm based on the pairwise majority-comparison matrix derived from voters' preference profiles. We show that this algorithm induces exactly the winner set of the Schulze rule (Schulze, 1997). Our algorithm successively eliminates weaker candidates in terms of all-pairs comparisons, thereby reflecting a dual spirit to Condorcet's original idea of splitting preference cycles (de Condorcet, 1785). We further show that the direct sum of the survival sets obtained at each elimination round coincides with the Schwartz set (Schwartz, 1972). These two equivalence results provide a formal mathematical foundation for the ``folklore'' relationship between the Schulze winner set and the Schwartz set, as well as a new Condorcetian interpretation of the Schulze winner set.

Suggested Citation

  • Satoru Fujishige & Leo Goto & Satoshi Nakada, 2026. "A New Method for Finding the Schulze Winner Set," Papers 2606.02213, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2026.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2606.02213
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2606.02213
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ching, Stephen, 1996. "A Simple Characterization of Plurality Rule," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 298-302, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Satoru Fujishige & Satoshi Nakada, 2026. "Scoring Rules as Least-Squares Estimators," Papers 2607.10145, arXiv.org.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hiroki Saitoh, 2022. "Characterization of tie-breaking plurality rules," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 59(1), pages 139-173, July.
    2. Kelly, Jerry S. & Qi, Shaofang, 2016. "Characterizing plurality rule on a fixed population," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 39-41.
    3. Horan, Sean Michael, 2021. "Agendas in legislative decision-making," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 16(1), January.
    4. Z. Emel Öztürk, 2020. "Consistency of scoring rules: a reinvestigation of composition-consistency," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 49(3), pages 801-831, September.
    5. Brandl, Florian & Peters, Dominik, 2022. "Approval voting under dichotomous preferences: A catalogue of characterizations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    6. Eyal Baharad & Leif Danziger, 2018. "Voting in Hiring Committees: Which "Almost" Rule is Optimal?," CESifo Working Paper Series 6851, CESifo.
    7. Baharad, Eyal & Danziger, Leif, 2018. "Voting in Hiring Committees: Which "Almost" Rule Is Optimal?," IZA Discussion Papers 11287, IZA Network @ LISER.
    8. Lederer, Patrick, 2024. "Bivariate scoring rules: Unifying the characterizations of positional scoring rules and Kemeny's rule," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    9. Pivato, Marcus, 2013. "Variable-population voting rules," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 210-221.
    10. Walter Bossert & Kotaro Suzumura, 2017. "The greatest unhappiness of the least number," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 49(3), pages 637-655, December.
    11. Walter Bossert & Kotaro Suzumura, 2020. "Positionalist voting rules: a general definition and axiomatic characterizations," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 55(1), pages 85-116, June.
    12. Alcalde-Unzu, Jorge & Vorsatz, Marc, 2009. "Size approval voting," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(3), pages 1187-1210, May.
    13. Alcalde-Unzu, Jorge & Vorsatz, Marc, 2014. "Non-anonymous ballot aggregation: An axiomatic generalization of Approval Voting," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 69-78.
    14. Wesley H. Holliday & Eric Pacuit, 2026. "An extension of May’s Theorem to three alternatives: axiomatizing Minimax voting," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 66(2), pages 395-422, March.
    15. Federico Fioravanti & Ulle Endriss, 2024. "Voting with Partial Orders: The Plurality and Anti-Plurality Classes," Working Papers 329, Red Nacional de Investigadores en Economía (RedNIE).
    16. Sekiguchi, Yohei, 2012. "A characterization of the plurality rule," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 116(3), pages 330-332.
    17. Jac C. Heckelman, 2021. "Characterizing plurality using the majoritarian condition: a new proof and implications for other scoring rules," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 189(3), pages 335-346, December.
    18. Fasil Alemante & Donald E. Campbell & Jerry S. Kelly, 2016. "Characterizing the resolute part of monotonic social choice correspondences," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 62(4), pages 765-783, October.
    19. Barberà, Salvador & Bossert, Walter & Moreno-Ternero, Juan D., 2023. "Wine rankings and the Borda method," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(2), pages 122-138, May.
    20. Z. Emel Ozturk, 2017. "A composition-consistency characterization of the plurality rule," Working Papers 2017_04, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2606.02213. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.