Template:Voting criteria table long
Appearance
Criterion Method |
Majority loser | Condorcet winner |
Condorcet loser | Smith |
Smith-IIA |
IIA/LIIA |
Cloneproof | Monotone | Participation | Truncation-resistance | Turkey resistance | Sincere favorite |
Ballot
type |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Anti-plurality | Yes | No | No | No | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | Single mark |
Approval | No | No | No | No | No | Yes |
Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Approvals |
Baldwin | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | Ranking |
Black | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | No | Yes | No | No | No | No | Ranking |
Borda | Yes | No | Yes | No | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No | Ranking |
Bucklin | Yes | No | No | No | No | No | No | Yes | No | No | Yes | No | Ranking |
Coombs | Yes | No | Yes | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | Yes | Ranking |
Copeland | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | No | No | No | No | Ranking |
Dodgson | No | Yes | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | Ranking |
Highest median | Yes |
No | No | No | No | Yes |
Yes | Yes | No |
No | Yes | Yes | Scores |
Instant-runoff | style="background:#FFC7C7;color:black;vertical-align:middle;text-align:center;" class="table-no"|No | No | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | No | Ranking |
Kemeny–Young | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | LIIA Only | No | Yes | No | No | No | No | Ranking |
Minimax | No | Yes |
No | No | No | No | No | Yes | No | No |
No | No | Ranking |
Nanson | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | Ranking |
Plurality | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Single mark |
Random ballot |
No | No | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Single mark |
Ranked pairs | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | LIIA Only | Yes | Yes | No |
No | No | No | Ranking |
Runoff | Yes | No | Yes | No | No | No | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | No | Single mark |
Schulze | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No |
No | No | No | Ranking |
Score | No | No | No | No | No | Yes |
Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Scores |
Sortition |
No | No | No | No | No | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | None |
STAR | Yes | No | Yes | No | No | No | No | Yes | No | No | No | No | Scores |
Tideman alternative | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No | No | No | No | No | Ranking |
- ^ a b c Approval voting, score voting, and majority judgment satisfy IIA if it is assumed that voters rate candidates independently using their own scale. For this to hold, in some elections, some voters must use less than their full voting power despite having meaningful preferences among viable candidates.
- ^ a b c In Highest median, Ranked Pairs, and Schulze voting, there is always a regret-free, semi-honest ballot for any voter, holding all other ballots constant and assuming they know enough about how others will vote. Under such circumstances, there is always at least one way for a voter to participate without grading any less-preferred candidate above any more-preferred one.
- ^ a b A variant of Minimax that counts only pairwise opposition, not opposition minus support, fails the Condorcet criterion and meets later-no-harm.
Template documentation
This template's documentation is missing, inadequate, or does not accurately describe its functionality or the parameters in its code. Please help to expand and improve it. |