====================================================================== SOURCE FILE: bv130r2_dead_rung_bloc.yaml TABULATED FILE: bv130r2_dead_rung_bloc_tabulated.txt ====================================================================== election_title: "BV130-r2 — 6 candidates / 3 winners, Bloc STAR (dead-rung lot tie; 9ff9jk)" # BV tracker fields (read by tools_adam/scripts/build_bv_registry.py; engine ignores). bv_test_id: BV130-r2 bv_election_id: 9ff9jk bv_results_url: https://bettervoting.com/9ff9jk/results scenario_description: |- 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. num_winners: 3 voting_method: Bloc STAR lot_numbers: [Finn, Ben, Dan, Eve, Ada, Cara] # BV's drawn order (perm) — reproduces Dan, Ada, Eve 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 expected_winners: - Dan - Ada - Eve # file: bv130r2_dead_rung_bloc.yaml ====================================================================== TABULATION RESULTS ====================================================================== === BV130-r2 — 6 candidates / 3 winners, Bloc STAR (dead-rung lot tie; 9ff9jk) === 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. --- 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) --- 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 [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 [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