Adaptively Weighted Audits of Instant-Runoff Voting Elections: AWAIRE
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2307.10972v2
- Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2023 12:28:12 GMT
- Title: Adaptively Weighted Audits of Instant-Runoff Voting Elections: AWAIRE
- Authors: Alexander Ek, Philip B. Stark, Peter J. Stuckey, Damjan Vukcevic
- Abstract summary: 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.
- Score: 61.872917066847855
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: An election audit is risk-limiting if the audit limits (to a pre-specified
threshold) the chance that an erroneous electoral outcome will be certified.
Extant 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. CVRs are not always available,
for instance, in jurisdictions that tabulate IRV contests manually.
We develop an RLA method (AWAIRE) that uses adaptively weighted averages of
test supermartingales to efficiently audit IRV elections when CVRs are not
available. The adaptive weighting 'learns' an efficient set of hypotheses to
test to confirm the election outcome. When accurate CVRs are available, AWAIRE
can use them to increase the efficiency to match the performance of existing
methods that require CVRs.
We provide an open-source prototype implementation that can handle elections
with up to six candidates. Simulations using data from real elections show that
AWAIRE is likely to be efficient in practice. We discuss how to extend the
computational approach to handle elections with more candidates.
Adaptively weighted averages of test supermartingales are a general tool,
useful beyond election audits to test collections of hypotheses sequentially
while rigorously controlling the familywise error rate.
Related papers
- Auditing for Bias in Ad Delivery Using Inferred Demographic Attributes [50.37313459134418]
We study the effects of inference error on auditing for bias in one prominent application: black-box audit of ad delivery using paired ads.
We propose a way to mitigate the inference error when evaluating skew in ad delivery algorithms.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-30T18:57:03Z) - 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) - Efficient Weighting Schemes for Auditing Instant-Runoff Voting Elections [57.67176250198289]
AWAIRE involves adaptively weighted averages of test statistics, essentially "learning" an effective set of hypotheses to test.
We explore schemes and settings more extensively, to identify and recommend efficient choices for practice.
A limitation of the current AWAIRE implementation is its restriction to a small number of candidates.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-18T10:13:01Z) - The Decisive Power of Indecision: Low-Variance Risk-Limiting Audits and Election Contestation via Marginal Mark Recording [51.82772358241505]
Risk-limiting audits (RLAs) are techniques for verifying the outcomes of large elections.
We define new families of audits that improve efficiency and offer advances in statistical power.
New audits are enabled by revisiting the standard notion of a cast-vote record so that it can declare multiple possible mark interpretations.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-09T16:23:54Z) - New Algorithms and Applications for Risk-Limiting Audits [4.375873233252245]
Risk-limiting audits (RLAs) are a significant tool in increasing confidence in the accuracy of elections.
This work suggests a new generic method, called Batchcomp", for converting classical (ballot-level) RLAs into ones that operate on batches.
We present an adaptation of ALPHA, an existing RLA method, to a method which applies to censuses.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-06T13:34:39Z) - Ballot-Polling Audits of Instant-Runoff Voting Elections with a
Dirichlet-Tree Model [23.14629947453497]
Instant-runoff voting (IRV) is used in several countries around the world.
It requires voters to rank candidates in order of preference, and uses a counting algorithm that is more complex than systems such as first-past-the-post or scoring rules.
An even more complex system, the single transferable vote (STV), is used when multiple candidates need to be elected.
There is currently no known risk-limiting audit (RLA) method for STV, other than a full manual count of the ballots.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-09-08T15:35:50Z) - Auditing Ranked Voting Elections with Dirichlet-Tree Models: First Steps [23.14629947453497]
Ranked voting systems are used in many places around the world.
There is no known risk-limiting audit (RLA) method for STV other than a full hand count.
We present a new approach to auditing ranked systems that uses a statistical model, a Dirichlet-tree, that can cope with high-dimensional parameters in a computationally efficient manner.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-06-29T13:06:42Z) - A First Approach to Risk-Limiting Audits for Single Transferable Vote
Elections [27.102139020324678]
Risk-limiting audits (RLAs) are an increasingly important method for checking that the reported outcome of an election is, in fact, correct.
This paper presents the first approach to risk-limiting audits for single transferable vote (STV) elections.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-12-18T12:36:39Z) - 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.