Condorcet loser criterion: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 20:
C (Cookies) is the CL here.
|caption=Example of finding the Condorcet loser|border=|max-width=}}In single-winner [[voting system]] theory, the '''Condorcet loser criterion''' (or anti-Condorcet criterion) is a measure for differentiating voting systems. It implies the [[majority loser criterion]].
A [[voting system]] complying with the Condorcet loser criterion will never allow a ''Condorcet loser'' (anti-[[Condorcet candidate]]) to win. A Condorcet loser is a candidate who can be defeated in a [[Condorcet method|head-to-head competition]] against each other candidate. (Not all elections will have a Condorcet loser since it is possible for three or more candidates to be mutually defeatable in different head-to-head competitions. However, there is always a [[Smith loser set]], which is the smallest group of candidates such that any of them can be defeated by any candidate not in the group.)
A slightly weaker (easier to pass) version is the majority Condorcet loser criterion, which requires that a candidate who can be defeated ''by a majority'' in a head-to-head competition against each other candidate, lose. It is possible for a system, such as Majority Judgment, which allows voters not to state a preference between two candidates, to pass the MCLC but not the CLC.{{citation needed|date=January 2012}}
| |||