election_title: Three neighbors, two seats — Allocated Score
voting_method: allocated
num_winners: 2

scenario_description: |
  The smallest election in which two proportional STAR tabulations disagree:
  three voters, three candidates, two seats. Ana, Bo and Cleo are up; Cleo is
  the runaway favorite and takes seat 1 under every method. The argument is
  entirely about seat 2.

  Neighbor 2 is the odd one out. She is lukewarm on Cleo (2 stars), cool on Bo
  (2), and gives Ana nothing. Neighbors 1 and 3 both love Cleo (5) and like
  Ana (4).

  After Cleo is seated, the three methods disagree about what neighbor 2's
  two-star support for Cleo COST her:

    * Allocated Score allocates by score TIER. The 5-star group (neighbors 1
      and 3) already overfills the 1.5-voter quota, so neighbor 2 is never
      allocated at all and keeps her FULL weight. She alone decides seat 2,
      and her best remaining candidate is Bo -- who has 3 points in total,
      against Ana's 8.  ->  Bo, Cleo

    * Sequentially Spent Score charges every supporter in PROPORTION to the
      score they gave, so neighbor 2's 2 stars for Cleo did cost her weight.
      She can no longer outweigh the residue left to neighbors 1 and 3, and
      their 4-star support carries Ana in.  ->  Ana, Cleo

    * Reweighted Range Voting divides every ballot's weight instead of
      spending it, and lands with SSS.  ->  Ana, Cleo

  Same three ballots; the seat turns purely on how a partial supporter is
  charged for a winner they only partly wanted. Found by an exhaustive
  smallest-first search and verified stable across five tiebreaker seeds, so
  no lot is involved.

ballots: |-
  Ana,Bo,Cleo
  4,0,5      # Neighbor 1 — loves Cleo, likes Ana
  0,2,2      # Neighbor 2 — lukewarm on Cleo and Bo, nothing for Ana
  4,1,5      # Neighbor 3 — loves Cleo, likes Ana

# file: three_neighbors_allocated.yaml

expected_winners:
  - Bo
  - Cleo

# file: three_neighbors_allocated.yaml