BV132 — verify number of votes cast (Bloc STAR, 2 seats)¶

Generated from bv132_verify_votes_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) · 2 seats · Expected winners: C, B

▶ Live on BetterVoting: vote · results ↗ (election verify).

Scenario¶

Bloc STAR, 3 candidates, 2 seats, 4 ballots — two of them "flat" (every candidate scored the same: 1,1,1 and 5,5,5). This is the LH reference for BetterVoting test BV132 / issue #1073 ("verify number of votes cast").

LH counts ALL 4 ballots: totals C=12, B=10, A=8. - Seat 1: C and B advance; in the runoff C is preferred (C 2, B 0, Equal 2), so C takes seat 1. - Seat 2: remove C; B beats A in the runoff (B 2, A 0, Equal 2), so B takes seat 2. Winners: C, B.

The BV bug (#1073): BetterVoting reports only "2 voters" with totals A=2, B=4, C=6 — which is exactly the two non-flat ballots (1,2,3 and 1,2,3). It has DROPPED the two flat ballots, the same "flat ballot treated as an abstention" family as #1407 / #1035. Note the winners (C, B) are UNAFFECTED — a flat ballot adds equally to every candidate and is Equal in every head-to-head, so it can never change a STAR/Bloc result. The defect is the vote-count / turnout display, not the winner.

Confirmed from the frozen BV export (election 3494cb, bv132_..._bv_export.json): all 4 ballots ARE stored in the export's Ballots array — so ingestion is fine. The drop happens in TABULATION: summaryData reports nAbstentions=2, nTallyVotes=2, i.e. BV classifies the two flat ballots as abstentions and tallies only the two 1,2,3 ballots (A=2, B=4, C=6). Same root cause as #1407 (flat ballot mis-filed as abstention). The export also labels votingMethod "STAR" rather than "Bloc STAR" — cf. #904.

Ballots¶

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

A,B,C
1,1,1
5,5,5
1,2,3
1,2,3

What the engine says¶

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

[Divergence from STAR]
  STAR                   = C
  Choose-One (Plurality) = A   (differs from STAR)
  RCV-IRV                = A   (differs from STAR)
  Note: 2 of 4 ballots (50%) had equal non-zero scores, so their ranks were
        decided by candidate priority order. The RCV-IRV result may be an
        artifact of score-to-rank tie-breaking rather than a deep
        difference.
  Note: Ranked Robin (RCV-RR) agrees with STAR, so RCV-IRV is the lone
        outlier — the classic center-squeeze signature.
  Full round-by-round reports (generated for review):
  RCV-IRV rounds: cases_tabulated/bv132_verify_votes_bloc_RCV-IRV_tabulated.txt

--- Bloc STAR Voting Method (2 winners) ---

[Bloc STAR]
 Tabulating 4 ballots to fill 2 seats.
Count × A,B,C
    2 × 1,2,3
    1 × 1,1,1
    1 × 5,5,5

[Bloc STAR: Round 1: Scoring Round]
 The two highest-scoring candidates advance to the next round.
   C             -- 12 -- First place
   B             -- 10 -- Second place
   A             --  8
 C and B advance.

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

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

[Bloc STAR: Round 2: Scoring Round]
 The two highest-scoring candidates advance to the next round.
   B             -- 10 -- First place
   A             --  8 -- Second place
 B and A advance.

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

[Bloc STAR: Winners — Bloc STAR Voting Method (2 winners)]
 C
 B

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 2-winner count below,
        so no Top-2 finalists are marked.
               |      A     |     B     |     C     |
-----------------------------------------------------
           A > |    ---     |0 - 2 - 2  |0 - 2 - 2  |
           B > | 2 - 2 - 0  |   ---     |0 - 2 - 2  |
           C > | 2 - 2 - 0  |2 - 2 - 0  |   ---     |

[Condorcet Winner]
  Condorcet Winner: C — matches the STAR winner

[Condorcet Loser]
  Condorcet Loser: A — loses every head-to-head matchup — elected by Choose-One (Plurality)!

[Score Distribution] (how many ballots gave each star rating)
                Score
Candidate  5  4  3  2  1  0  | Total   Avg
A          1  0  0  0  3  0  |     8   2.0
B          1  0  0  2  1  0  |    10   2.5
C          1  0  2  0  1  0  |    12   3.0

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/bv132_verify_votes_bloc.yaml

BV132 — verify number of votes cast (Bloc STAR, 2 seats)¶

Scenario¶

Ballots¶

What the engine says¶

Full audit — preference matrix, Condorcet, and score distribution¶

See also¶