Condorcet criterion
E711177
The Condorcet criterion is a voting system standard requiring that if a candidate would win every head-to-head contest against each other candidate, that candidate must be the overall election winner.
All labels observed (2)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Condorcet criterion canonical | 2 |
| Condorcet method | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T8083771 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Condorcet criterion Context triple: [Borda count, violatesProperty, Condorcet criterion]
-
A.
Condorcet paradox
The Condorcet paradox is a voting theory phenomenon where collective preferences can become cyclic and inconsistent, even when individual voters’ preferences are perfectly rational and transitive.
-
B.
Borda count
The Borda count is a ranked voting method in which voters order candidates and points are assigned based on position in each ranking, with the candidate having the highest total score winning.
-
C.
Gibbard–Satterthwaite theorem
The Gibbard–Satterthwaite theorem is a fundamental result in social choice theory showing that every reasonable voting system with at least three options is susceptible to strategic manipulation by voters.
-
D.
Arrow’s impossibility theorem
Arrow’s impossibility theorem is a foundational result in social choice theory showing that no voting system can convert individual preferences into a collective ranking while simultaneously satisfying a set of seemingly reasonable fairness criteria.
-
E.
Sainte-Laguë method
The Sainte-Laguë method is a highest-averages system of party-list proportional representation that allocates seats more evenly between large and small parties than the d’Hondt method.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Condorcet criterion Target entity description: The Condorcet criterion is a voting system standard requiring that if a candidate would win every head-to-head contest against each other candidate, that candidate must be the overall election winner.
-
A.
Condorcet paradox
The Condorcet paradox is a voting theory phenomenon where collective preferences can become cyclic and inconsistent, even when individual voters’ preferences are perfectly rational and transitive.
-
B.
Borda count
The Borda count is a ranked voting method in which voters order candidates and points are assigned based on position in each ranking, with the candidate having the highest total score winning.
-
C.
Gibbard–Satterthwaite theorem
The Gibbard–Satterthwaite theorem is a fundamental result in social choice theory showing that every reasonable voting system with at least three options is susceptible to strategic manipulation by voters.
-
D.
Arrow’s impossibility theorem
Arrow’s impossibility theorem is a foundational result in social choice theory showing that no voting system can convert individual preferences into a collective ranking while simultaneously satisfying a set of seemingly reasonable fairness criteria.
-
E.
Sainte-Laguë method
The Sainte-Laguë method is a highest-averages system of party-list proportional representation that allocates seats more evenly between large and small parties than the d’Hondt method.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (46)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
social choice theory concept
ⓘ
voting system criterion ⓘ |
| appliesTo | single-winner voting methods ⓘ |
| assessedBy | examining pairwise majority matrices ⓘ |
| associatedWith | Marquis de Condorcet's work on majority decisions ⓘ |
| assumes | voters submit preference rankings over candidates ⓘ |
| basedOn | pairwise majority preferences ⓘ |
| category |
electoral system criterion
ⓘ
normative property of voting rules ⓘ |
| compatibleWith | Condorcet paradox ⓘ |
| concerns | head-to-head contests between candidates ⓘ |
| contrastsWith | utility-based criteria in social choice ⓘ |
| defines |
Condorcet winner
ⓘ
linked to:
Condorcet method
|
| doesNotRequire | existence of a Condorcet winner in every election ⓘ |
| field |
social choice theory
ⓘ
voting theory ⓘ |
| formalDefinition | If a candidate defeats every other candidate in pairwise majority contests, that candidate must be the unique winner ⓘ |
| goal | to ensure that broadly preferred candidates are elected ⓘ |
| implies | majority criterion ⓘ |
| influences | design of modern Condorcet methods ⓘ |
| namedAfter | Marquis de Condorcet ⓘ |
| notSatisfiedBy |
Borda count
ⓘ
instant-runoff voting ⓘ supplementary vote ⓘ |
| notSatisfiedBy | plurality voting ⓘ |
| originatedIn | 18th-century voting theory ⓘ |
| relatedConcept |
Condorcet method
ⓘ
Condorcet winner ⓘ majority rule ⓘ pairwise comparison ⓘ |
| relevantFor | elections with three or more candidates ⓘ |
| requires | that a Condorcet winner, if it exists, must win the election ⓘ |
| satisfiedBy |
Black's method
ⓘ
Copeland method ⓘ Kemeny–Young method ⓘ Minimax Condorcet method ⓘ
linked to:
Condorcet method
Nanson method ⓘ
linked to:
Borda count
Ranked Pairs ⓘ
linked to:
Condorcet method
Schulze method ⓘ Tideman alternative methods that elect the Condorcet winner when one exists ⓘ |
| status | widely discussed standard in voting theory ⓘ |
| strongerThan | majority criterion ⓘ |
| usedToEvaluate |
consistency with majority preferences
ⓘ
fairness of voting rules ⓘ |
| violatedBy | any rule that can elect a candidate beaten head-to-head by another candidate ⓘ |
| violatedWhen | a non-Condorcet winner is elected despite existence of a Condorcet winner ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Condorcet criterion Description of subject: The Condorcet criterion is a voting system standard requiring that if a candidate would win every head-to-head contest against each other candidate, that candidate must be the overall election winner.
Referenced by (3)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
linked to: Condorcet criterion