  The classical paradox of social choice theory asserts that there is no fair
way to deterministically select a winner in an election among more than two
candidates; the only definite collective preferences are between individual
pairs of candidates. Combinatorially, one may summarize this information with a
graph-theoretic tournament on N vertices (one per candidate), placing an edge
from U to V if U would beat V in an election between only those two candidates
(no ties are permitted). One well-studied procedure for selecting a winner is
to specify a complete binary tree whose leaves are labeled by the candidates,
and evaluate it by running pairwise elections between the pairs of leaves,
sending the winners to successive rounds of pairwise elections which ultimately
terminate with a single winner. This structure is called a voting tree.
  Much research has investigated which functions on tournaments are computable
in this way. Fischer, Procaccia, and Samorodnitsky quantitatively studied the
computability of the Copeland rule, which returns a vertex of maximum
out-degree in the given tournament. Perhaps surprisingly, the best previously
known voting tree could only guarantee a returned out-degree of at least log_2
N, despite the fact that every tournament has a vertex of degree at least
(N-1)/2. In this paper, we present three constructions, the first of which
substantially improves this guarantee to \Theta(sqrt{N}). The other two
demonstrate the richness of the voting tree universe, with a tree that resists
manipulation, and a tree which implements arithmetic modulo three.
