Ranked Choice Voting And Condorcet Failure in the Alaska 2022 Special Election: How Might Other Voting Systems Compare?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2303.00108v2
• Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2024 19:08:19 GMT
• Title: Ranked Choice Voting And Condorcet Failure in the Alaska 2022 Special Election: How Might Other Voting Systems Compare?
• Authors: Jeanne N. Clelland,
• Abstract summary: The August 2022 special election for the U.S. House of Representatives in Alaska featured three main candidates. Results of this election displayed a well-known but relatively rare phenomenon known as "Condorcet failure:" We use the data in the Cast Vote Record to explore the range of likely outcomes if this election had been conducted under two alternative voting systems.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The August 2022 special election for the U.S. House of Representatives in Alaska featured three main candidates and was conducted by the single-winner ranked choice voting system known as "Instant Runoff Voting." The results of this election displayed a well-known but relatively rare phenomenon known as "Condorcet failure:" Nick Begich was eliminated in the first round despite being more broadly acceptable to the electorate than either of the other two candidates. More specifically, Begich was the "Condorcet winner" of this election: Based on the Cast Vote Record, he would have defeated each of the other two candidates in head-to-head contests, but he was eliminated in the first round of ballot counting due to receiving the fewest first-place votes. The purpose of this paper is to use the data in the Cast Vote Record to explore the range of likely outcomes if this election had been conducted under two alternative voting systems: Approval Voting and STAR ("Score Then Automatic Runoff") Voting. We find that under the best assumptions available about voter behavior, it is likely -- but not at all certain -- that Peltola would still have won the election under Approval Voting, while Begich would almost certainly have won under STAR Voting.

Related papers

• Idiosyncratic properties of Australian STV election counting [52.669205232251585]
  Single Transferable Vote (STV) counting is used in several jurisdictions in Australia. This paper shows some of the unintuitive properties of some of these systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-18T01:19:27Z)
• Improving the Computational Efficiency of Adaptive Audits of IRV Elections [54.427049258408424]
  AWAIRE can audit IRV contests with any number of candidates, but the original implementation incurred memory and computation costs that grew superexponentially with the number of candidates. This paper improves the algorithmic implementation of AWAIRE in three ways that make it practical to audit IRV contests with 55 candidates, compared to the previous 6 candidates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-23T13:28:00Z)
• Learning to Manipulate under Limited Information [44.99833362998488]
  We trained over 70,000 neural networks of 26 sizes to manipulate against 8 different voting methods. We find that some voting methods, such as Borda, are highly manipulable by networks with limited information, while others, such as Instant Runoff, are not.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-29T18:49:50Z)
• Partially Informed Elections -- Analyzing the Impact of Forced Ballot Truncation on Bucklin, Coombs, Plurality with Runoff, and Schulze [0.0]
  This study analyzes how forced ballot truncation affects the Bucklin, Coombs, plurality with runoff, and Schulze voting systems' abilities to output their true winning sets. Results show that plurality with runoff was the most resistant to forced truncation, followed by Schulze, Bucklin, and Coombs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-29T02:44:48Z)
• The Still Secret Ballot: The Limited Privacy Cost of Transparent Election Results [0.0]
  We show how an analyst unravels the secret ballot by uniquely linking votes on an anonymous ballot to the voter's name and address in the public voter file. We conclude the ballot can be both public and still as secret as it is under typical reporting practices.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-08T07:27:41Z)
• Adaptively Weighted Audits of Instant-Runoff Voting Elections: AWAIRE [61.872917066847855]
  Methods for auditing instant-runoff voting (IRV) elections are either not risk-limiting or require cast vote records (CVRs), the voting system's electronic record of the votes on each ballot. We develop an RLA method that uses adaptively weighted averages of test supermartingales to efficiently audit IRV elections when CVRs are not available.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-20T15:55:34Z)
• Candidate Incentive Distributions: How voting methods shape electoral incentives [0.0]
  We find that Instant Runoff Voting incentivizes candidates to appeal to a wider range of voters than Plurality Voting. We find that Condorcet methods and STAR (Score Then Automatic Runoff) Voting provide the most balanced incentives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-12T14:32:46Z)
• Risk-Limiting Audits for Condorcet Elections [27.102139020324678]
  We show how we can efficiently audit Condorcet elections for a number of variations. We also compare the audit efficiency (how many ballots we expect to sample) of IRV and Condorcet elections.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-18T22:08:17Z)
• Novelty in news search: a longitudinal study of the 2020 US elections [62.997667081978825]
  We analyze novelty, a measurement of new items that emerge in the top news search results. We find more new items emerging for election related queries compared to topical or stable queries. We argue that such imbalances affect the visibility of political candidates in news searches during electoral periods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-09T08:42:37Z)
• Identifying Possible Winners in Ranked Choice Voting Elections with Outstanding Ballots [0.0]
  ranked-choice voting (RCV) allows voters to rank their choices, and the results are computed in rounds. RCV election outcomes are not always apparent on election night, and can take several weeks to be published. We present an algorithm for efficiently computing possible winners of RCV elections from partially known ballots.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-25T22:08:15Z)
• Bribery as a Measure of Candidate Success: Complexity Results for Approval-Based Multiwinner Rules [58.8640284079665]
  We study the problem of bribery in multiwinner elections, for the case where the voters cast approval ballots (i.e., sets of candidates they approve) We consider a number of approval-based multiwinner rules (AV, SAV, GAV, RAV, approval-based Chamberlin--Courant, and PAV) In general, our problems tend to be easier when we limit out bribery actions on increasing the number of approvals of the candidate that we want to be in a winning committee.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-19T08:26:40Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.