BV130-r2 — 6 candidates / 3 winners, Bloc STAR (dead-rung lot tie; 9ff9jk)

Generated from bv130r2_dead_rung_bloc.yaml — do not edit by hand. Regenerate: python STARVote_LH_tabulation_engine/tools_adam/scripts/build_yaml_pages.py.

Method: Bloc STAR (multi-winner, majoritarian) · 3 seats · Expected winners: Dan, Ada, Eve

▶ Live on BetterVoting: vote · results ↗ (election 9ff9jk · test BV130-r2).

Official tie-break (lot) order: Finn > Ben > Dan > Eve > Ada > Cara — consulted only if every deterministic tiebreaker stays tied (how the ladder works).

Scenario

The LH reference for BetterVoting test BV130-r2 (real election 9ff9jk, "Bloc STAR", 3 seats), marked "Passed" in the tracker. Six candidates (Ada, Ben, Cara, Dan, Eve, Finn), 4 ballots, and — deliberately — no candidate ever scores a 5 (the whole election is capped at 4).

NOTE: this is the r2 RETEST, a DISTINCT election from the original BV130 (a 9-ballot "Someone I Like / Santa Claus / The Lesser Evil" case backing the star-server#731 reporting issue) — see bv130_bloc_pagination_731.yaml.

Seat 1 is a perfect Ada/Dan tie that survives EVERY deterministic rung: both total 15, pairwise 1-1 (2 Equal Support), and — because nothing reaches 5 — five-star is 0-0 (the "dead rung"). Only the LOT can separate them.

BetterVoting broke it with a random draw whose perm was [Finn, Ben, Dan, Eve, Ada, Cara] — Dan ahead of Ada — so BV elected Dan (seat 1), Ada (seat 2), Eve (seat 3). Pinning lot_numbers to that perm reproduces BV exactly. A PUBLISHED order [Ada, Ben, Cara, Dan, Eve, Finn] would instead elect Ada (seat 1), Dan (seat 2), Eve (seat 3): same three winners, but the tied pair's seats swap. The result is therefore non-reproducible (cf. #1063 / #1417), and BV's top-level tieBreakType is reported as "none" even though a seat was decided by the lot.

Ballots

Row 1 = candidate names; each later row is one voter's 0–5 scores (a N × prefix = N identical ballots).

Ada,Ben,Cara,Dan,Eve,Finn
4,1,2,3,2,0
3,2,1,4,2,1
4,2,1,4,3,2
4,2,1,4,3,1

What the engine says

The count, step by step — the rounds and how the winner is reached:

--- Bloc STAR Voting Method (3 winners) ---

[Bloc STAR]
 Tabulating 4 ballots to fill 3 seats.
Ada,Ben,Cara,Dan,Eve,Finn
  4,  1,   2,  3,  2,   0
  3,  2,   1,  4,  2,   1
  4,  2,   1,  4,  3,   2
  4,  2,   1,  4,  3,   1

[Bloc STAR: Round 1: Scoring Round]
 The two highest-scoring candidates advance to the next round.
   Ada           -- 15 -- First place
   Dan           -- 15 -- Second place
   Eve           -- 10
   Ben           --  7
   Cara          --  5
   Finn          --  4
 Ada and Dan advance.

[Bloc STAR: Round 1: Automatic Runoff Round]
 The candidate preferred in the most head-to-head matchups wins.
   Ada           -- 1 -- Tied for first place
   Dan           -- 1 -- Tied for first place
   Equal Support -- 2
 There's a two-way tie for first.

[Bloc STAR: Round 1: Automatic Runoff Round: First tiebreaker]
 The highest-scoring candidate wins.
   Ada           -- 15 -- Tied for first place
   Dan           -- 15 -- Tied for first place
 There's still a two-way tie for first.

[Bloc STAR: Round 1: Automatic Runoff Round: Second tiebreaker]
 The candidate with the most votes of score 5 wins.
   Ada           -- 0 -- Tied for first place
   Dan           -- 0 -- Tied for first place
 There's still a two-way tie for first.

*(Ties are resolved by choosing the tied candidate with the highest-priority official lot number.)*
    Lot-number priority order: ['Finn', 'Ben', 'Dan', 'Eve', 'Ada', 'Cara']

[Tiebreaker: Lot Number Priority]
  Tie among: ['Ada', 'Dan']
  Resolved: ['Dan'] (selected by lot-number priority).

[Lot-decided tie — rare]
  ⚠ The ballots did not break this tie: the deterministic rungs
    (pairwise / score, then five-star) all came back equal, so the
    pre-published LOT order chose among the tied candidates — the
    result here was set by lot, not by the votes. Usually the
    "dead rung": no tied candidate held a score-5 vote (five-star
    counts fives, not fours). Verify the tied candidates' 5-counts.

──────────────────────────────────────────────────

[Bloc STAR: Round 2: Scoring Round]
 The two highest-scoring candidates advance to the next round.
   Ada           -- 15 -- First place
   Eve           -- 10 -- Second place
   Ben           --  7
   Cara          --  5
   Finn          --  4
 Ada and Eve advance.

[Bloc STAR: Round 2: Automatic Runoff Round]
 The candidate preferred in the most head-to-head matchups wins.
   Ada           -- 4 -- First place
   Eve           -- 0
   Equal Support -- 0
 Ada wins.
   Runoff math:
     4  ballots cast
   − 0  Equal Support (no preference between the two finalists)
     ─
     4  voters with a preference  (majority = 3)
           Ada 4 (100%)  ·  Eve 0 (0%)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────

[Bloc STAR: Round 3: Scoring Round]
 The two highest-scoring candidates advance to the next round.
   Eve           -- 10 -- First place
   Ben           --  7 -- Second place
   Cara          --  5
   Finn          --  4
 Eve and Ben advance.

[Bloc STAR: Round 3: Automatic Runoff Round]
 The candidate preferred in the most head-to-head matchups wins.
   Eve           -- 3 -- First place
   Ben           -- 0
   Equal Support -- 1
 Eve wins.
   Runoff math:
     4  ballots cast
   − 1  Equal Support (no preference between the two finalists)
     ─
     3  voters with a preference  (majority = 2)
           Eve 3 (100%)  ·  Ben 0 (0%)

[Bloc STAR: Winners — Bloc STAR Voting Method (3 winners)]
 Dan
 Ada
 Eve

Full audit — preference matrix, Condorcet, and score distribution

--- Preference Matrix ---
Head-to-head / pairwise comparison
Legend: For - Equal Support - Against
        Informational only — not part of the 3-winner count below,
        so no Top-2 finalists are marked.
               |     Ada    |    Ben    |    Cara   |    Dan    |    Eve    |    Finn   |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Ada > |    ---     |4 - 0 - 0  |4 - 0 - 0  |1 - 2 - 1  |4 - 0 - 0  |4 - 0 - 0  |
         Ben > | 0 - 0 - 4  |   ---     |3 - 0 - 1  |0 - 0 - 4  |0 - 1 - 3  |3 - 1 - 0  |
        Cara > | 0 - 0 - 4  |1 - 0 - 3  |   ---     |0 - 0 - 4  |0 - 1 - 3  |1 - 2 - 1  |
         Dan > | 1 - 2 - 1  |4 - 0 - 0  |4 - 0 - 0  |   ---     |4 - 0 - 0  |4 - 0 - 0  |
         Eve > | 0 - 0 - 4  |3 - 1 - 0  |3 - 1 - 0  |0 - 0 - 4  |   ---     |4 - 0 - 0  |
        Finn > | 0 - 0 - 4  |0 - 1 - 3  |1 - 2 - 1  |0 - 0 - 4  |0 - 0 - 4  |   ---     |

[Condorcet Winner]
  No strict Condorcet winner; unbeaten candidates: Ada, Dan (pairwise ties)

[Condorcet Loser]
  No strict Condorcet loser; jointly weak Condorcet losers: Cara, Finn (winless — pairwise ties)

[Score Distribution] (how many ballots gave each star rating)
                Score
Candidate  5  4  3  2  1  0  | Total   Avg
Ada        0  3  1  0  0  0  |    15   3.8
Ben        0  0  0  3  1  0  |     7   1.8
Cara       0  0  0  1  3  0  |     5   1.3
Dan        0  3  1  0  0  0  |    15   3.8
Eve        0  0  2  2  0  0  |    10   2.5
Finn       0  0  0  1  2  1  |     4   1.0

Everything in one file: the _tabulated mirror (regenerated on every run; every analysis forced on).

Run it yourself:

python STARVote_LH_tabulation_engine/starvote_larry_hastings.py 02_STAR_Bloc/02_Examples/cases/bv130r2_dead_rung_bloc.yaml

See also

• Ties & tie-breaking (topic hub)
• The tie-breaking ladder (full chain)
• Glossary · all cases by method

More cases in this set: 00_c3_b3_bloc-baseline-2-seats · 01_c4_b2_bloc-star-2-seats · b484mbm_tie_every_rung · bloc_lot_path_dependence_a_c3_b5 · bloc_lot_path_dependence_b_c3_b5 · bv129_score_tiebreak_bloc · bv130_bloc_pagination_731 · bv131_guido_bloc · bv132_verify_votes_bloc · bv1525_condorcet_loser_bloc · bv1815_bloc_3c2s_basic · bv1835_8h3yrx_score_leader_no_seat · bv2105_r4dqvd_ice_cream_bloc · bv2105r2_w3vvff_ice_cream_recheck · bv2269_t488h9_race_nobody_can_lose · bv750_tie_breaking_bloc · lackner_skowron_shadow_bloc_star_c7_b12 · race_nobody_can_lose_two_seat_control