# On the ranking of a Swiss system chess team tournament

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/1507.05045 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/1507.05045/

## Key facts

- Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 8 Jul 2015.

## Built on by (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [Inconsistency thresholds for incomplete pairwise comparison matrices](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.10558/) (2021)
- [MineAnyBuild: Benchmarking Spatial Planning for Open-world AI Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.20148/) (2025)
- [Reconstruction: A Blind Benchmark for Recovering Research Ideas from Pre-Publication Bibliographies](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.16645/) (2026)
- [AI-powered mechanisms as judges: Breaking ties in chess](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.08289/) (2022)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The paper suggests a family of paired comparison-based scoring procedures for ranking the participants of a Swiss system chess team tournament. We present the challenges of ranking in Swiss system, the features of individual and team competitions as well as the failures of the official rankings based on lexicographical order. The tournament is represented as a ranking problem such that the linearly-solvable row sum (score), generalized row sum, and least squares methods have favourable axiomatic properties. Two chess team European championships are analysed as case studies. Final rankings are compared by their distances and visualized with multidimensional scaling (MDS). Differences to the official ranking are revealed by the decomposition of the least squares method. Rankings are evaluated by prediction power, retrodictive performance, and stability. The paper argues for the use of least squares method with a results matrix favouring match points on the basis of its relative insensitivity to the choice between match and board points, retrodictive accuracy, and robustness.