YAML test-case index — by voting method

Auto-generated — do not edit by hand. Run python STARVote_LH_tabulation_engine/tools_adam/scripts/build_yaml_index.py to refresh (a pytest fails if it's stale).

This page is one cut (by method). For the full faceted catalog — slice by ballot type, seat class, single/multi-winner, character, backing — see CATALOG.md (fact tables: races.csv, elections.csv).

Election YAMLs live in many folders (the test harnesses glob specific ones, so they're indexed in place, not moved). Each file declares a voting_method and num_winners; this catalog groups them so you can browse by method. Excludes _tabulated mirrors, raw _demo_dropbox drops, generated copies, and deliberately-malformed negative fixtures.

Titles come from each file's election_title field (the convention — add one to make a file's title explicit & searchable). Where that's missing, a file's first # comment line is shown in italics as a fallback.

594 election files (500 single-winner, 94 multi-winner) across 18 method(s).

Method	Files
STAR	274
RCV-IRV (Hare)	49
Ranked Robin (RCV-RR / Copeland)	100
Approval	25
STV (proportional RCV)	10
Bloc STAR	2
STAR-PR (Sequential Selection)	8
Reweighted Range	6
Allocated Score (STAR-PR)	27
3-2-1	1
APPROVAL_MULTI_WINNER	7
BLOC STAR	29
CAV	1
IRV	19
PLURALITY	28
RANGE	4
RCV-IRV	3
RR	1

STAR (274)

Case (page)	Folder	Winners	Title / expected	src
same_total_different_shape_c3_b7	01_STAR/01_Learn/reporting/cases/	1	Same-ish total, different shape — the sandwich vote → Avocado	.yaml
02a_c3_b1_three-candidates	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Three candidates, one ballot - single-winner STAR → Choco	.yaml
02b_c3_b2_three-candidates	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Three candidates, two ballots - single-winner STAR → Vanilla	.yaml
03a_c3_b3_style-bullet-vote	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Voting styles — a valid STAR bullet vote (3 candidates) → Vanilla	.yaml
03b_c3_b3_1_style-protest-vote	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Voting styles — low-score ballots → Almond	.yaml
03b_c3_b3_2_expand_style-protest-vote	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Voting styles — low-score ballots (continued) → Almond	.yaml
03c_c6_b8_style-gallery	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Voting styles — eight ways to fill out one 5-star ballot → Bianca	.yaml
03d_c5_b5_style-gallery-five-more	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Voting styles — five more ways to fill out one 5-star ballot → Clara	.yaml
04b_c4_b3_display-options-all	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	All options demo → Strawberry	.yaml
05a_c5_b3_unanimous-ballots	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Unanimous ballots (five candidates) → Andre	.yaml
06a_c9_b3_large-field-equal-support	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Large field (9 candidates) — STAR scales, and Equal Support decides → Carmen	.yaml
06b_c9_runoff-overturns-leader	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Large field (9 candidates) — the runoff OVERTURNS the score leader → Carmen	.yaml
09_c4_b100_tennessee-capital	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Tennessee Capital — classic STAR example → Nashville	.yaml
abstentions	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Abstentions — blank and abstaining ballots in STAR → Dog	.yaml
bv2182_tg4779_faq_runoff_reversal	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	BV2182 — why the automatic runoff (and Equal Support) → Almond	.yaml
bv2184_fyy886_lunch_vote	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	BV2184 — The team lunch vote → Pizza	.yaml
bv2187_qrw6wb_ann-bob-cal	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Ann, Bob, Cal - the canonical leading example (single-winner STAR) → Bob	.yaml
bv2256_c8h3tb_traditional_style	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Traditional voting style — one mark each (BV2256, c8h3tb) → Ella	.yaml
bv2263_xw23m9_over_50_percent	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	BV2263 — Over 50%: single-winner STAR, a candidate with every point on every ballot → A	.yaml
csv_ambiguity_ex1_c4_b8	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	The eight ambiguous CSV lines, disambiguated (BV issue #778 ex1) → B	.yaml
display_options_demo	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Display options demo → Don	.yaml
equal_support_runoff_demo	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Equal Support — counted in both rounds, neutral only in the tie-break → A	.yaml
quorum_demo_c3_b6	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Quorum — an abstention still counts toward turnout → Anna	.yaml
quorum_fail_demo_c3_b6	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Quorum FAILS — won the count, but not elected	.yaml
same_mean_different_spread_c2_b5	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Same mean, different spread — the consensus candidate and the polarizing one → Blake	.yaml
star_ala_approval	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	STAR à la Approval — 0/1 & marker ballots are legal on a STAR ballot → D	.yaml
three_winners_cw_score_runoff	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Three notions of "winner" disagree — Condorcet, Score, and Runoff → Bob	.yaml
vote_splitting	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Vote splitting — two chocolates split the majority → DarkChoco	.yaml
vote_splitting2	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Vote splitting — two chocolates split the majority → DarkChoco	.yaml
vote_splitting3	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Vote splitting — two chocolates split the majority → DarkChoco	.yaml
vote_splitting_scenario1_spoiler	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Vote splitting — scenario 1 of 3 — the spoiler strikes → DarkChoco	.yaml
vote_splitting_scenario2_bloc_leads	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Vote splitting — scenario 2 of 3 — no spoiler (bloc leader wins anyway) → DarkChoco	.yaml
vote_splitting_scenario3_outsider_wins	01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/	1	Vote splitting — scenario 3 of 3 — no spoiler (the outsider truly wins) → Vanilla	.yaml
01a_c3_b3_more-stars-fewer-voters	01_STAR/02_Examples/runoff_overturns_leader/cases/	1	More stars, fewer voters — the runoff overturns the score leader → Brownie	.yaml
01b_c3_b9_overturn-holds-at-scale	01_STAR/02_Examples/runoff_overturns_leader/cases/	1	The same overturn at scale — 67% to 33% → Brownie	.yaml
02_c5_b5_leader-overturned	01_STAR/02_Examples/runoff_overturns_leader/cases/	1	Five candidates — the score leader is overturned in the runoff → Boston	.yaml
03_c7_b3_ice-cream-live	01_STAR/02_Examples/runoff_overturns_leader/cases/	1	Ice Cream — Flavor of the Year (the real recorded race) → ChocoAlm	.yaml
04_c4_b3_runoff-confirms-leader	01_STAR/02_Examples/runoff_overturns_leader/cases/	1	The control case — here the runoff CONFIRMS the score leader → Blue	.yaml
05_c3_b5_low-scores-bv1265	01_STAR/02_Examples/runoff_overturns_leader/cases/	1	Low scores, switched winner — the popover example (BetterVoting BV1265) → A	.yaml
reversal_convincing_c3_b100	01_STAR/02_Examples/runoff_overturns_leader/cases/	1	Runoff reversal, the convincing case — an intense minority favorite loses to the majority's compromise → Nora	.yaml
reversal_jarring_c3_b100	01_STAR/02_Examples/runoff_overturns_leader/cases/	1	Runoff reversal, the jarring case — the near-consensus favorite loses a 51–49 runoff to a polarizing rival → Rye	.yaml
bv2219_36f4v2_equal_opposite_base	01_STAR/03_Criteria/equal_and_opposite/cases/	1	Equal & opposite — the base election (Comet wins) → Comet	.yaml
bv2220_q8q9m7_equal_opposite_plus_cancel	01_STAR/03_Criteria/equal_and_opposite/cases/	1	Equal & opposite — add two mirror ballots, Comet still wins → Comet	.yaml
bv2206_7mckyg_fbc_honest_tepid_consensus	01_STAR/03_Criteria/favorite_betrayal/cases/	1	Favorite betrayal in STAR (1 of 2) — honest ballots: the tepid consensus misses the runoff → Clover	.yaml
bv2207_b6xrdr_fbc_betrayal_pays	01_STAR/03_Criteria/favorite_betrayal/cases/	1	Favorite betrayal in STAR (2 of 2) — nine voters demote their favorite and it pays → Bluebell	.yaml
bv2212_g3f7r2_cycle_spoiler	01_STAR/03_Criteria/iia_cycle_spoiler/cases/	1	STAR's runoff is spoiler-sensitive under a Condorcet cycle — a losing candidate (Ben) flips Alice vs Carla (BV2212, g3f7r2) → Alice	.yaml
bv95a_9m6rxr_favorite_survives_one_rival	01_STAR/03_Criteria/majority_criterion/cases/	1	BV95a — Majority Criterion: favorite survives when the majority backs ONE rival → Ada	.yaml
bv95b_7pdq3r_favorite_loses_two_rivals	01_STAR/03_Criteria/majority_criterion/cases/	1	BV95b — Majority Criterion: favorite LOSES when the majority backs TWO rivals → Bruno	.yaml
majority_vs_consensus_51_49	01_STAR/03_Criteria/majority_criterion/cases/	1	Majority criterion vs. the consensus candidate — the 51/49 polarized electorate → Celia	.yaml
bv215_26khr3_nota_wins	01_STAR/03_Criteria/none_of_the_above/cases/	1	BV215 — None of the Above wins (STAR) — with a null abstention → None of the Above	.yaml
tactical_max_c3_b9_hedged	01_STAR/03_Criteria/tactical_maximization/cases/	1	Tactical maximization in STAR (2 of 2) — four voters hedge to a 5, and hand the seat to the hedge → Bruno	.yaml
tactical_max_c3_b9_honest	01_STAR/03_Criteria/tactical_maximization/cases/	1	Tactical maximization in STAR (1 of 2) — honest ballots: the hedgers' preference decides the runoff → Alma	.yaml
bv126_ties_every_step_8fvd2x	01_STAR/03_Criteria/tie_break_dead_rung/cases/	1	BV126 — ties at every step (single-winner STAR); #1052 → Amy	.yaml
dead_rung_scoring_dead_cap2	01_STAR/03_Criteria/tie_break_dead_rung/cases/	1	Dead rung — scoring round, dead five-star rung, cap 2 → Ann	.yaml
dead_rung_scoring_dead_cap3	01_STAR/03_Criteria/tie_break_dead_rung/cases/	1	Dead rung — scoring round, dead five-star rung, cap 3 → Ann	.yaml
dead_rung_scoring_dead_cap4	01_STAR/03_Criteria/tie_break_dead_rung/cases/	1	Dead rung — scoring round, dead five-star rung, cap 4 → Ann	.yaml
tie_break_01_scoring_five_star_breaks	01_STAR/03_Criteria/tie_break_dead_rung/cases/	1	Tie-break 01 — scoring-round tie, FIVE-STAR breaks it (a 5 exists) → Alice	.yaml
tie_break_02_scoring_no_fives_to_lot	01_STAR/03_Criteria/tie_break_dead_rung/cases/	1	Tie-break 02 — scoring-round tie, NO fives, five-star is a dead rung → LOT → Alice	.yaml
tie_break_03_runoff_no_fives_to_lot	01_STAR/03_Criteria/tie_break_dead_rung/cases/	1	Tie-break 03 — runoff tie, score tied, NO fives → LOT → Alice	.yaml
tie_break_04_runoff_five_star_breaks	01_STAR/03_Criteria/tie_break_dead_rung/cases/	1	Tie-break 04 — runoff tie, score tied, FIVE-STAR breaks it (a 5 exists) → Alice	.yaml
tie_break_05_scoring_five_star_vs_adversarial_lot	01_STAR/03_Criteria/tie_break_dead_rung/cases/	1	Dead rung 01 — scoring tie, five-star rung ALIVE → Ben	.yaml
tie_break_06_scoring_dead_rung_adversarial_lot	01_STAR/03_Criteria/tie_break_dead_rung/cases/	1	Dead rung 02 — same tie, but nobody scored a 5 → Ann	.yaml
tie_break_07_runoff_five_star_vs_adversarial_lot	01_STAR/03_Criteria/tie_break_dead_rung/cases/	1	Dead rung 03 — runoff tie broken by five-star → Ann	.yaml
tie_break_08_runoff_dead_rung_adversarial_lot	01_STAR/03_Criteria/tie_break_dead_rung/cases/	1	Dead rung 04 — runoff tie, nobody scored a 5, lot decides → Ben	.yaml
tie_break_09_five_star_tied_nonzero	01_STAR/03_Criteria/tie_break_dead_rung/cases/	1	Dead rung 05 — five-star rung alive but non-separating → Ben	.yaml
lot_random_vs_published_jfk7pd_bv_order	01_STAR/03_Criteria/tie_break_dead_rung/lot_random_vs_published_jfk7pd/	1	Lot-decided tie (BV jfk7pd) — following BetterVoting's random draw → Ben	.yaml
lot_random_vs_published_jfk7pd_published_order	01_STAR/03_Criteria/tie_break_dead_rung/lot_random_vs_published_jfk7pd/	1	Lot-decided tie (BV jfk7pd) — following a deterministic published order → Ada	.yaml
three_way_dead_rung_A	01_STAR/03_Criteria/tie_break_dead_rung/three_way_dead_rung_tie/	1	Three-way dead-rung tie — published order A,B,C elects A → A	.yaml
three_way_dead_rung_B	01_STAR/03_Criteria/tie_break_dead_rung/three_way_dead_rung_tie/	1	Three-way dead-rung tie — published order B,C,A elects B → B	.yaml
three_way_dead_rung_C	01_STAR/03_Criteria/tie_break_dead_rung/three_way_dead_rung_tie/	1	Three-way dead-rung tie — published order C,A,B elects C → C	.yaml
bv2180_fp62p2_ice_cream_ladder	01_STAR/03_Criteria/tie_break_ladder/cases/	1	Ice cream ladder — a STAR tie in both rounds, settled without the lot (BV2180, fp62p2) → Strawberry	.yaml
bv2276_qhjyr2_second_finalist_tie	01_STAR/03_Criteria/tie_break_ladder/cases/	1	Tied for the second finalist — the head-to-head rung settles it (BV2276, qhjyr2) → Ana	.yaml
bv830_vb3xv2_no_condorcet_tie_score	01_STAR/03_Criteria/tie_break_ladder/cases/	1	No Condorcet winner (top-two tie) — STAR breaks it by score (BV830, vb3xv2) → B	.yaml
bhckrf7_range_of_scores	01_STAR/04_Real_Elections/abstain_bugs/cases/	1	hckrf7 — Range of Scores counts 3 ballots on a page that says 1 voter → Cal Creative	.yaml
bv11_6xhfp8_full_equal_support	01_STAR/04_Real_Elections/abstain_bugs/cases/	1	BV11 — full & equal support (5,5) counted as abstentions → Ann	.yaml
bv655_jfrk9t_equal_opposition	01_STAR/04_Real_Elections/abstain_bugs/cases/	1	BV655 — 'equal opposition' (all-0) mislabeled as Abstained → Option 1	.yaml
abstention_reconciliation_min_c2_b6	01_STAR/04_Real_Elections/pet_real_bv_election/cases/	1	Abstention vs Equal Support — the minimal reconciliation case → Dog	.yaml
best_pet_c7_b461	01_STAR/04_Real_Elections/pet_real_bv_election/cases/	1	What Makes the Best Pet? → Dog	.yaml
flat_scores_abstention_c3_b8	01_STAR/04_Real_Elections/pet_real_bv_election/cases/	1	BV Abstentions and flat scores (Apple/Banana/Cherry, 8 ballots) → Banana	.yaml
small_abstention_c2_b5	01_STAR/04_Real_Elections/pet_real_bv_election/cases/	1	Equal Support vs Abstention — minimal STAR test (A/B, 5 ballots) → A	.yaml
Runoff_01_confirms_leader_r2pvc9	01_STAR/04_Real_Elections/runoff_reversal_bv_cases/cases/	1	Runoff 01 — Runoff confirms the leader (control) → Aspen	.yaml
Runoff_02_atom_reversal_yx9447	01_STAR/04_Real_Elections/runoff_reversal_bv_cases/cases/	1	Runoff 02 — the atom (smallest runoff reversal) → Boston	.yaml
Runoff_03_enthusiasts_vs_majority_rkgtpk	01_STAR/04_Real_Elections/runoff_reversal_bv_cases/cases/	1	Runoff 03 — two enthusiasts vs the majority → Eden	.yaml
Runoff_04_reversal_at_scale_bfjqmg	01_STAR/04_Real_Elections/runoff_reversal_bv_cases/cases/	1	Runoff 04 — the reversal holds at scale (67/33) → Olive	.yaml
Runoff_05_reversal_with_equal_support_xgkw3w	01_STAR/04_Real_Elections/runoff_reversal_bv_cases/cases/	1	Runoff 05 — reversal with Equal Support → Sage	.yaml
Runoff_06_confirms_at_scale_d664xw	01_STAR/04_Real_Elections/runoff_reversal_bv_cases/cases/	1	Runoff 06 — the runoff confirms the leader at scale (control) → Wren	.yaml
Runoff_07_flat_ballot_bv_bug_tf73v9	01_STAR/04_Real_Elections/runoff_reversal_bv_cases/cases/	1	Runoff 07 (WIP) — flat ballot exposes the BV abstention bug → Blair	.yaml
Runoff_08_ca_governor_reversal_gvdy42	01_STAR/04_Real_Elections/runoff_reversal_bv_cases/cases/	1	Runoff 08 — CA Governor, a real STAR field of 61 (BV2181, gvdy42) → Tom Steyer (D)	.yaml
ex01_district_combined	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 1 — Two districts, one mayor: the COMBINED city → Carmen	.yaml
ex01_district_east	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 1 — Two districts, one mayor: EAST district → Avery	.yaml
ex01_district_west	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 1 — Two districts, one mayor: WEST district → Avery	.yaml
ex02_bella_exits	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 2 — The tenth ballot: Bella withdraws → Chris	.yaml
ex02_nine_ballots	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 2 — The tenth ballot: the nine counted ballots → Alex	.yaml
ex02_tenth_ballot	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 2 — The tenth ballot: all ten ballots → Chris	.yaml
ex03_five_verdicts	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 3 — One electorate, five verdicts (the snack vote) → Cherry	.yaml
ex04_olympics_1994	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 4 — Lillehammer 1994: nine judges, three skaters, two winners → Baiul	.yaml
ex05_center_squeeze	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 5 — The squeezed bridge-builder (IRV vs STAR) → Brook	.yaml
ex06_bullet_backfire	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 6 — Bullet voting backfires: the strategic ballots → Cash	.yaml
ex06_bullet_honest	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 6 — Bullet voting backfires: the honest ballots → Bree	.yaml
ex07_vanishing_votes	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 7 — The vanishing votes that never vanished (a park-tree ballot drill) → Aspen	.yaml
ex08_minimal_reversal_2c	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 8 — a smallest runoff reversal (sample solution, two candidates) → A	.yaml
ex08_minimal_reversal_3c	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 8 — a small runoff reversal (sample solution, three candidates) → A	.yaml
ex10_generous	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 10 — Later-no-harm: the generous ballots → Bess	.yaml
ex10_reticent	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 10 — Later-no-harm: the reticent ballots → Amir	.yaml
ex11_spoiler_added	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 11 — Recruit a spoiler: Axl enters the race → Alba	.yaml
ex11_two_way_base	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 11 — Recruit a spoiler: the two-way base race → Alba	.yaml
ex13_opinions	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 13 — Where do you draw the line? The honest opinions (STAR) → Cora	.yaml
ex15_approval_pairwise	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 15a, second look — the same Yes/No ballots read pairwise → Blair	.yaml
ex15_score_profile	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 15b — a 0–5 score profile (which method is this?) → Clara	.yaml
Flat_scores_ties_01_baseline_clean	01_STAR/09_Parked/Flat_scores_ties/cases/	1	Flat scores 01 — clean top two (works-fine baseline) → Apple	.yaml
Flat_scores_ties_02_runoff_tie_2cand	01_STAR/09_Parked/Flat_scores_ties/cases/	1	Flat scores 02 — runoff tie, two candidates (everyone equal) → Almond	.yaml
Flat_scores_ties_03_runoff_tie_split	01_STAR/09_Parked/Flat_scores_ties/cases/	1	Flat scores 03 — runoff tie, an even 1-1 split → Athens	.yaml
Flat_scores_ties_04_scoring_tie_2way	01_STAR/09_Parked/Flat_scores_ties/cases/	1	Flat scores 04 — scoring-round tie for the 2nd finalist slot (2-way) → Aral	.yaml
Flat_scores_ties_05_scoring_tie_3way_xmyf7k	01_STAR/09_Parked/Flat_scores_ties/cases/	1	Flat scores 05 — scoring-round 3-way tie (BV555, xmyf7k) → A	.yaml
Flat_scores_ties_06_scoring_tie_4way	01_STAR/09_Parked/Flat_scores_ties/cases/	1	Flat scores 06 — scoring-round 4-way tie (ties at every step) → Ava	.yaml
Flat_scores_ties_07_fully_flat	01_STAR/09_Parked/Flat_scores_ties/cases/	1	Flat scores 07 — fully flat ballots (the maximal tie + abstention trap) → Ararat	.yaml
Flat_scores_ties_08_all_flat_zero_count	01_STAR/09_Parked/Flat_scores_ties/cases/	1	Flat scores 08 — every ballot flat (BetterVoting counts 0) → Anchovy	.yaml
01a_c2_b1_two-candidates	01_STAR/09_Parked/silly_two_cand_STAR/cases/	1	The simplest possible STAR Voting example → Chocolate	.yaml
01a_c2_b2_two-candidates	01_STAR/09_Parked/silly_two_cand_STAR/cases/	1	Same as before - but this time two ballots → Chocolate	.yaml
01b_c2_b2_two-candidates	01_STAR/09_Parked/silly_two_cand_STAR/cases/	1	Again, very similar - this time second ballot is 5 and 0 → Choco	.yaml
01c_c2_b3_two-candidates	01_STAR/09_Parked/silly_two_cand_STAR/cases/	1	Equal support example ("I like both flavors") → Choco	.yaml
rrv_sample_c15_b13_three-parties	03_STAR_PR/02_Examples/cases/	1	RRV sample as single-winner STAR — three parties (Purple/Orange/Yellow) → Orange5	.yaml
cycle_C03_fewV15_noise_1	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 3 cands, 15 voters, cycle (STAR A, RR B) → A	.yaml
cycle_C03_fewV15_noise_2	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 3 cands, 15 voters, cycle (STAR A, RR C) → A	.yaml
cycle_C03_medV45_noise_1	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 3 cands, 45 voters, cycle (STAR A, RR B) → A	.yaml
cycle_C03_medV45_noise_2	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 3 cands, 45 voters, cycle (STAR B, RR C) → B	.yaml
cycle_C05_fewV15_noise_1	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 5 cands, 15 voters, cycle (STAR B, RR E) → B	.yaml
cycle_C05_fewV15_noise_2	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 5 cands, 15 voters, cycle (STAR A, RR E) → A	.yaml
cycle_C05_fewV28_bloc_1	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 5 cands, 28 voters, cycle (STAR A, RR C) → A	.yaml
cycle_C05_medV45_noise_1	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 5 cands, 45 voters, cycle (STAR A, RR B) → A	.yaml
cycle_C05_medV45_noise_2	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 5 cands, 45 voters, cycle (STAR D, RR B) → D	.yaml
cycle_C07_fewV15_noise_1	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 7 cands, 15 voters, cycle (STAR D, RR A) → D	.yaml
cycle_C07_fewV28_bloc_2	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 7 cands, 28 voters, cycle (STAR D, RR A) → D	.yaml
cycle_C07_largeV598_bloc_1	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 7 cands, 598 voters, cycle (STAR C, RR E) → C	.yaml
cycle_C07_medV149_bloc_2	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 7 cands, 149 voters, cycle (STAR F, RR C) → F	.yaml
cycle_C10_fewV15_noise_1	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 10 cands, 15 voters, cycle (STAR A, RR C) → A	.yaml
cycle_C10_fewV15_noise_2	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 10 cands, 15 voters, cycle (STAR J, RR F) → J	.yaml
cycle_C10_fewV28_bloc_1	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 10 cands, 28 voters, cycle (STAR C, RR F) → C	.yaml
cycle_C10_fewV29_bloc_2	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 10 cands, 29 voters, cycle (STAR C, RR B) → C	.yaml
cycle_C10_medV148_bloc_1	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 10 cands, 148 voters, cycle (STAR E, RR G) → E	.yaml
cycle_C10_medV149_bloc_2	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 10 cands, 149 voters, cycle (STAR I, RR H) → I	.yaml
cycle_C10_medV45_noise_1	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 10 cands, 45 voters, cycle (STAR E, RR G) → E	.yaml
cycle_C10_medV45_noise_2	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 10 cands, 45 voters, cycle (STAR A, RR I) → A	.yaml
darkhorse_C03_fewV15_noise_1	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 3 cands, 15 voters, darkhorse (STAR A, RR C) → A	.yaml
darkhorse_C05_largeV599_bloc_1	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 5 cands, 599 voters, darkhorse (STAR A, RR E) → A	.yaml
darkhorse_C07_fewV30_bloc_1	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 7 cands, 30 voters, darkhorse (STAR D, RR C) → D	.yaml
darkhorse_C07_largeV597_bloc_1	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 7 cands, 597 voters, darkhorse (STAR D, RR E) → D	.yaml
darkhorse_C07_largeV598_bloc_2	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 7 cands, 598 voters, darkhorse (STAR E, RR G) → E	.yaml
darkhorse_C07_medV147_bloc_1	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 7 cands, 147 voters, darkhorse (STAR F, RR D) → F	.yaml
darkhorse_C07_medV45_noise_1	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 7 cands, 45 voters, darkhorse (STAR E, RR A) → E	.yaml
darkhorse_C10_largeV598_bloc_1	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 10 cands, 598 voters, darkhorse (STAR G, RR F) → G	.yaml
darkhorse_C10_largeV599_bloc_2	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/star_vs_rr_divergence/	1	STAR vs RR divergence -- 10 cands, 599 voters, darkhorse (STAR B, RR E) → B	.yaml
01_c3_b31_graders-divide	06_Other/ballot_style_lab/cases/	1	The Graders' Divide — a harsh 0-2 camp meets a gentle 3-5 camp → Clara	.yaml
02_c4_b40_cliff-city	06_Other/ballot_style_lab/cases/	1	Cliff City food trucks — everyone scores 0 or 3-5, nothing between → Churro	.yaml
03_c4_b33_bullet-storm	06_Other/ballot_style_lab/cases/	1	Bullet Storm — a bullet-voting electorate and the few who spread → Carla	.yaml
04_c4_b47_noise-soup	06_Other/ballot_style_lab/cases/	1	Noise Soup — weak factions, cross-winds, flat-liners and static → Caleb	.yaml
05_c3_b38_squeeze-survives	06_Other/ballot_style_lab/cases/	1	Does the squeeze survive noise? Two poles, one consensus middle → Ben	.yaml
06_c4_b24_narrow-bands	06_Other/ballot_style_lab/cases/	1	Narrow Bands — a paint-swatch election scored in slivers of the scale → Beige	.yaml
lot_tiebreak_bv_order.yaml	YAML_library/1_positive/	1	Lot tiebreak — following BetterVoting's drawn order → Ben	—
lot_tiebreak_published_order.yaml	YAML_library/1_positive/	1	Lot tiebreak — following the new published-lot approach → Ada	—
BV_Library_star_condorcet_winner	method_comparisons/BV_Library/cases/	1	BV parity — STAR: highest-scoring Condorcet winner → Allison	.yaml
BV_Library_star_runnerup_tie	method_comparisons/BV_Library/cases/	1	BV parity — STAR: runner-up tie, Allison wins → Allison	.yaml
BV_Library_star_runoff	method_comparisons/BV_Library/cases/	1	BV parity — STAR: runoff, lower total wins the runoff → Bill	.yaml
BV_Library_star_runoff_score_tie_five_star	method_comparisons/BV_Library/cases/	1	BV parity — STAR: runoff & score tie, five-star tiebreaker → Allison	.yaml
BV_Library_star_runoff_tie_score_resolves	method_comparisons/BV_Library/cases/	1	BV parity — STAR: runoff tie broken by score → Bill	.yaml
count_simplicity_star_vs_irv	method_comparisons/_main/cases/	1	Same winner, very different counts — STAR adds, IRV eliminates → Carmen	.yaml
bv2213_k3fmwv_alaska_2022	method_comparisons/alaska_2022/cases/	1	Alaska 2022 US House special (reduced model) — STAR & Ranked Robin elect Begich, the Condorcet winner RCV-IRV cut → Begich	.yaml
bv2214_m3hb6y_alaska_2022_general	method_comparisons/alaska_2022_general/cases/	1	Alaska 2022 US House general (reduced model) — IRV got it right: all four counts elect the Condorcet winner, Peltola → Peltola	.yaml
hh41_03_marks_read_pairwise	method_comparisons/approval_majority_criterion/cases/	1	Hamlin & Hua §4.1 — the same marks read pairwise: 60 of 100 voters express no preference → B	.yaml
hh41_04_stipulated_utilities_star	method_comparisons/approval_majority_criterion/cases/	1	Hamlin & Hua §4.1 — their own utility stipulation, on a 0-5 ballot: A 380, B 370, A wins → A	.yaml
bv2280_37yf8x_star	method_comparisons/ballot_expressiveness/cases/	1	Nine candidates, 25 voters — the 0–5 score ballot → Finn	.yaml
Black_Curtain_01_c3_b5_hidden-consensus	method_comparisons/black_curtain/cases/	1	The Black Curtain → Cal	.yaml
Black_Curtain_01b_c3_b5_dichotomous	method_comparisons/black_curtain/cases/	1	The Black Curtain → Bob	.yaml
Black_Curtain_02_c3_b5_near-clones	method_comparisons/black_curtain/cases/	1	The Black Curtain → Cal	.yaml
Black_Curtain_03_c3_b5_polarized-on-cal	method_comparisons/black_curtain/cases/	1	The Black Curtain → Cal	.yaml
Black_Curtain_04_c4_b5_four-candidates	method_comparisons/black_curtain/cases/	1	The Black Curtain → Cal	.yaml
condorcet_1788_star	method_comparisons/borda_condorcet_1788/cases/	1	Condorcet's 1788 rebuttal to Borda — STAR elects the Condorcet winner → Peter	.yaml
brams_ex3_two_candidates_c2_b5	method_comparisons/brams_grading_paradox/cases/	1	Brams Example 3 — two candidates: two loud fans vs three mild preferences → Beth	.yaml
brams_ex6_three_winners_c3_b9	method_comparisons/brams_grading_paradox/cases/	1	Brams Example 6 — three counts, three winners (STAR sides with head-to-head) → Cole	.yaml
brams_grading_paradox_c3_b3	method_comparisons/brams_grading_paradox/cases/	1	Brams' grading paradox — the grade leader loses the runoff → Baker	.yaml
center_squeeze_star	method_comparisons/center_squeeze/cases/	1	Center squeeze — STAR elects the consensus (Center) → Center	.yaml
center_squeeze_voteline_1d	method_comparisons/center_squeeze/cases/	1	Center squeeze — the voteline 1D spectrum (Red / Green / Yellow) → Green	.yaml
bv2137_ywckmg_star	method_comparisons/center_squeeze_bv2137/cases/	1	Center Squeeze — STAR (ranks→scores): agrees with Condorcet, not IRV → Anderson	.yaml
majority_illusion_c3_b41_score_vs_star	method_comparisons/ces_majority_illusion/cases/	1	The majority illusion — Score elects Brian, STAR elects Alice → Alice	.yaml
majority_illusion_c3_b41_two_rivals	method_comparisons/ces_majority_illusion/cases/	1	The majority illusion, one score changed — the majority loses Alice → Brian	.yaml
chicken_star	method_comparisons/chicken_dilemma/cases/	1	Chicken / Burr dilemma — STAR resolves it (allies A & B beat C; A wins honestly) → A	.yaml
margins_star	method_comparisons/copeland_vs_borda_margins/cases/	1	Margins matter — STAR on the same twelve ballots (rank converted 5/3/0) → Almond	.yaml
crowded_field_c3_star	method_comparisons/crowded_field/cases/	1	Crowded field, rung 3 — 3 candidates, 65 voters, counted by STAR → Diego	.yaml
crowded_field_c5_star	method_comparisons/crowded_field/cases/	1	Crowded field, rung 5 — 5 candidates, 65 voters, counted by STAR → Diego	.yaml
crowded_field_c7_star	method_comparisons/crowded_field/cases/	1	Crowded field, rung 7 — 7 candidates, 65 voters, counted by STAR → Clara	.yaml
dark_horse_star	method_comparisons/dark_horse_borda/cases/	1	Dark Horse — STAR elects the honest winner A (Borda would elect the dark horse D) → A	.yaml
b38b7fg_districting_combined	method_comparisons/districting_cost/cases/	1	Two chapters, one delegate — Both chapters together (9 members) → Cleo	.yaml
b38b7fg_districting_north	method_comparisons/districting_cost/cases/	1	Two chapters, one delegate — Northside chapter (5 members) → Ana	.yaml
b38b7fg_districting_south	method_comparisons/districting_cost/cases/	1	Two chapters, one delegate — Southside chapter (4 members) → Beto	.yaml
bv2173_gmfv4c_edelman_saari_cancellation	method_comparisons/edelman_condorcet_myth/cases/	1	Edelman's 'Myth of the Condorcet Winner' 81 voters — the score count says Ben, the majorities say Ada → Ada	.yaml
edelman_perfect_component_c3_b30	method_comparisons/edelman_condorcet_myth/cases/	1	A perfect 'Condorcet component' (30 voters) — every count ties; any winner is an artifact → Ada	.yaml
bv2168_6w2gq7_fairvote_40_15_40_moderate_cw	method_comparisons/fairvote_condorcet_claims/cases/	1	FairVote's own hypothetical (45/12/43) — the moderate IS the majority's pairwise choice → Moderate	.yaml
bv2169_2jrfpg_fairvote_shifted_left_liberal_cw	method_comparisons/fairvote_condorcet_claims/cases/	1	Same three candidates, electorate shifts left — the 'strong liberal' IS the Condorcet winner → Liberal	.yaml
bv2229_7j2bqf_french_2017_honest	method_comparisons/fairvote_star_whitepaper/cases/	1	FairVote white paper — French 2017 (HONEST): STAR elects the centrist Macron → Macron	.yaml
bv2230_2hqmrd_french_2017_burial	method_comparisons/fairvote_star_whitepaper/cases/	1	FairVote white paper — French 2017 (BURIAL): coordinated strategy squeezes Macron out → Melenchon	.yaml
bv2231_b4yr3v_wa_2010_honest	method_comparisons/fairvote_star_whitepaper/cases/	1	FairVote white paper — Washington 2010 (HONEST): STAR elects the moderate Berkey → Berkey	.yaml
bv2232_24b623_wa_2010_burial	method_comparisons/fairvote_star_whitepaper/cases/	1	FairVote white paper — Washington 2010 (BURIAL): the squeeze works on STAR, but IRV resists it → Harper	.yaml
bv2227_3xgkck_honest_star	method_comparisons/favorite_betrayal_irv/cases/	1	Favorite betrayal — the fix: STAR & Ranked Robin elect Center from the HONEST ballots → Center	.yaml
bv2144_mxfmhm_star	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.1 — STAR (ranks→scores): elects the Condorcet winner → Bo	.yaml
bv2145_6fj2kg_star	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.2 — STAR (ranks→scores): elects the Condorcet winner → Ada	.yaml
bv2146_krk2px_star	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.2 after the raise — STAR: unmoved, still Ada → Ada	.yaml
bv2147_9gdrqg_star	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.3 District I — STAR: also Bruno → Bruno	.yaml
bv2148_h87k6v_star	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.3 District II — STAR: also Bruno → Bruno	.yaml
bv2149_byk9v2_star	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.3 Combined — STAR: Bruno, consistent with both districts → Bruno	.yaml
bv2150_dxg8pb_star	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.4 full electorate — STAR: elects the Condorcet winner Beth → Beth	.yaml
bv2151_97hbpw_star	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.4 after two no-shows — STAR: unmoved, still Beth → Beth	.yaml
bv2160_r6qc8h_star	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Fishburn Ex.14 — STAR: B wins the electorate whose Borda count is truncation-unstable → B	.yaml
bv2161_q3h4fk_star	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Borda SCC Ex.15 — STAR: C wins (and stays won when a loser exits) → C	.yaml
bv2162_4htk44_star	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Nurmi Ex.16 sincere — STAR: elects the Condorcet winner B → B	.yaml
bv2163_74j6vv_star	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Nurmi Ex.16 truncated — STAR: unmoved, still B → B	.yaml
bv2164_xbqq8t_star	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Coombs Ex.17 — STAR: Bree tops the scores, the Condorcet winner Arlo wins the runoff → Arlo	.yaml
bv2165_9vxcj7_star	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Coombs Ex.19 full — STAR: Boone wins the runoff 8–7 → Boone	.yaml
bv2166_b7b8dv_star	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Coombs Ex.19 no-show — STAR: the two abstainers get their favorite (STAR flips too) → Cass	.yaml
bv2167_f3dxq9_star	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Minimax Ex.29 — STAR: elects B, a top-cycle member, not the universal loser → B	.yaml
hillinger_t4_affine	method_comparisons/hillinger_evaluative_voting/cases/	1	Hillinger Table 4, rescaled — what 'cardinal' actually guarantees → Ana	.yaml
hillinger_t4_ev3	method_comparisons/hillinger_evaluative_voting/cases/	1	Hillinger Table 4 — three methods, three winners (EV-3 scale) → Ana	.yaml
bv2275_6mcgkq_a0_plurality	method_comparisons/kim_ordinal_vs_cardinal/cases/	1	Kim (A,B)-scoring, A=0 — the middle choice is worth nothing (Plurality) → Cocoa	.yaml
bv2275_6mcgkq_a1_negative	method_comparisons/kim_ordinal_vs_cardinal/cases/	1	Kim (A,B)-scoring, A=1 — the middle choice is worth everything (Negative voting) → Berry	.yaml
bv2275_6mcgkq_ahalf_borda	method_comparisons/kim_ordinal_vs_cardinal/cases/	1	Kim (A,B)-scoring, A=1/2 — the middle choice is worth half (Borda) → Almond	.yaml
bv2277_tqfdbg_mayor_star	method_comparisons/kissel_single_elimination_rcv/cases/	1	The mayor's race (STAR) — one grid, and Cora wins the runoff 69-31 → Cora	.yaml
bv2278_8cdkkc_five_way_star	method_comparisons/kissel_single_elimination_rcv/cases/	1	Kissel's five-way example (STAR) — the compromise reaches the runoff and wins → C	.yaml
bv2279_qywq7d_star	method_comparisons/majoritarian_vs_utilitarian/cases/	1	Three brothers, one fruit — the majoritarian winner is not the utilitarian one → Banana	.yaml
p3_manip_star	method_comparisons/manipulability_p3/cases/	1	P3 manipulated — two voters bury their 4th choice and STAR elects their favourite → Edinburgh	.yaml
p3_sincere_star	method_comparisons/manipulability_p3/cases/	1	P3 sincere — STAR elects Dublin (ranks converted 5/4/3/2/0) → Dublin	.yaml
bv2215_2p33qq_minority_winner	method_comparisons/minority_winner/cases/	1	Minority winner — 34% wins Choose-One, but STAR & Ranked Robin elect the majority's real choice (BV2215, 2p33qq) → Cleo	.yaml
pineapple_11pct	method_comparisons/minority_winner_progression/cases/	1	Pineapple progression (3/3) — 11% wins Choose-One, but Cheese is the real choice → Cheese	.yaml
pineapple_25pct	method_comparisons/minority_winner_progression/cases/	1	Pineapple progression (2/3) — 25% wins Choose-One, but Cheese is the real choice → Cheese	.yaml
pineapple_34pct	method_comparisons/minority_winner_progression/cases/	1	Pineapple progression (1/3) — 34% wins Choose-One, but Cheese is the real choice → Cheese	.yaml
mono_raise_delete_after	method_comparisons/monotonicity/cases/	1	STAR mono-raise-delete — part 2: raise X, delete Y-below-X, X loses → Z	.yaml
mono_raise_delete_before	method_comparisons/monotonicity/cases/	1	STAR mono-raise-delete — part 1: baseline, X wins → X	.yaml
monotonicity_star_after	method_comparisons/monotonicity/cases/	1	Monotonicity — STAR counterpart (AFTER — X still wins) → X	.yaml
monotonicity_star_before	method_comparisons/monotonicity/cases/	1	Monotonicity — STAR counterpart (BEFORE — X wins) → X	.yaml
bv2138_cxrf8v_star	method_comparisons/no_condorcet_bv2138/cases/	1	No Condorcet Winner — STAR (ranks→scores): Brad wins the runoff → Brad	.yaml
bv2155_cphxpt_tennessee_four_ways	method_comparisons/paradoxes_and_whoops/cases/	1	Tennessee capital, four ways — same ballots; Memphis, Knoxville or Nashville by count (BV2155) → Nashville	.yaml
bv2156_3grpbb_star_misses_condorcet	method_comparisons/paradoxes_and_whoops/cases/	1	STAR misses the Condorcet winner — STAR's own signature failure (BV2156) → Ada	.yaml
bv2157_mmcmpy_condorcet_cycle_rps	method_comparisons/paradoxes_and_whoops/cases/	1	A Condorcet cycle — rock, paper, scissors: no pairwise winner exists (BV2157) → Rock	.yaml
bv2174_yyhr66_noshow_baseline	method_comparisons/participation_no_show/cases/	1	No-show paradox (1 of 2) — 8 April fans stay home; RCV-IRV elects Bruno → Bruno	.yaml
bv2175_9dhv8y_noshow_showup	method_comparisons/participation_no_show/cases/	1	No-show paradox (2 of 2) — the 8 April fans vote; RCV-IRV hands them their LAST choice → April	.yaml
bv2132_ykjjhy_pet_star	method_comparisons/pet_poll_four_methods/cases/	1	BV2132 — Pet poll (STAR): the consensus center Cat wins → Cat	.yaml
bv2133_dyxrbr_pet2_star	method_comparisons/pet_poll_four_winners/cases/	1	BV2133 — Pet poll II (STAR): the consensus Cat wins → Cat	.yaml
bv2176_p8dp28_star	method_comparisons/postit_rcv_example/cases/	1	The Post-it RCV example (20 voters) — STAR: Blue wins the runoff RCV-IRV never held → Blue	.yaml
bv2178_8kg698_star	method_comparisons/postit_rcv_example/cases/	1	The Post-it switch, made real — STAR: Blue, now also the score co-leader → Blue	.yaml
bv2225_ywx39y_center_tolerated	method_comparisons/preference_vs_support/cases/	1	Preference vs Support — the center TOLERATED (wings score Blair 1) → Alex	.yaml
bv2226_82gg36_center_supported	method_comparisons/preference_vs_support/cases/	1	Preference vs Support — the center SUPPORTED (wings score Blair 4) → Blair	.yaml
reinf_combined_c3_b9_star	method_comparisons/reinforcement_paradox/cases/	1	Reinforcement — combined 9 voters, counted by STAR (scoring round → Ada, runoff → Cara) → Cara	.yaml
reversal_star_original	method_comparisons/reversal_symmetry/cases/	1	Reversal symmetry — STAR, original: B (STAR does not winner=loser here) → B	.yaml
reversal_star_reversed	method_comparisons/reversal_symmetry/cases/	1	Reversal symmetry — STAR, reversed: A (differs from original B — no winner=loser) → A	.yaml
same_ranks_lukewarm_c2_b3_procaccia_rosenschein	method_comparisons/same_ranks_different_utilities/cases/	1	Same ranks, lukewarm majority — the ranked ballot's blind spot (profile 1 of 2) → A	.yaml
same_ranks_polarized_c2_b3_procaccia_rosenschein	method_comparisons/same_ranks_different_utilities/cases/	1	Same ranks, polarized electorate — the ranked ballot's blind spot (profile 2 of 2) → A	.yaml
00_plurality_vs_majority	method_comparisons/split_voting/_main/	1	Plurality vs Majority — most votes isn't more than half → Blake	.yaml
01_political_left_split	method_comparisons/split_voting/_main/	1	Spoiler — a split coalition hands the seat to the minority → Labour	.yaml
02_icecream_chocolate_split	method_comparisons/split_voting/_main/	1	Spoiler — chocolate's majority splits, vanilla steals the win → MilkChoco	.yaml
03_lunch_veggie_vs_meat	method_comparisons/split_voting/_main/	1	Spoiler — the veggie majority splits, the burger wins the lunch vote → VeggieCurry	.yaml
04_star_wars_vote_split	method_comparisons/split_voting/_main/	1	The Voting Dilemma — Skywalker & Leia split the Rebel vote → Leia	.yaml
05a_residual_split_bullet-voting	method_comparisons/split_voting/_main/	1	STAR's residual split — a coalition bullet-votes itself apart → Cara	.yaml
05b_residual_split_expressive-fix	method_comparisons/split_voting/_main/	1	The cure — score your ally, and STAR's split disappears → Ada	.yaml
06_sub_majority_not_spoiled	method_comparisons/split_voting/_main/	1	A 41% winner that nothing spoiled — sub-majority is not the same as split → Aspen	.yaml
bv2221_2kcwbw_sincere	method_comparisons/star_5_1_0_challenge/cases/	1	Sincere STAR — the center wins (Beth is the Condorcet winner) → Beth	.yaml
bv2222_rfyk46_510_thin_star	method_comparisons/star_5_1_0_challenge/cases/	1	Strategic 5-1-0 STAR — the center is squeezed out (fails the CW) → Ana	.yaml
bv2223_dyh93j_510_real_star	method_comparisons/star_5_1_0_challenge/cases/	1	Strategic 5-1-0 STAR, real moderate base — STAR STILL elects the CW → Beth	.yaml
star_combined	method_comparisons/summability_demo/cases/	1	Summability demo — STAR combined A+B (Oak; precinct subtotals add up) → Oak	.yaml
star_district_A	method_comparisons/summability_demo/cases/	1	Summability demo — STAR district A (Maple wins outright) → Maple	.yaml
star_district_B	method_comparisons/summability_demo/cases/	1	Summability demo — STAR district B (Oak wins — a runoff reversal) → Oak	.yaml
bv2171_h93tm4_star	method_comparisons/symmetric_centrist_all_methods/cases/	1	Condorcet centrist, minimal form (8 voters) — STAR elects Casey → Casey	.yaml
bv2172_bkwfjr_star	method_comparisons/symmetric_centrist_all_methods/cases/	1	Condorcet centrist, full form (100 voters, 47/47/3/3) — STAR elects Casey → Casey	.yaml
bv2170_pp2q4q_star	method_comparisons/symmetric_centrist_bv2170/cases/	1	Symmetric centrist (47/47/3/3) — STAR: elects Casey, the Condorcet winner → Casey	.yaml
star_elects_a_covered_candidate_c4_b5	method_comparisons/tournament_solutions/cases/	1	STAR elects a covered candidate — five ballots, four cities → Denver	.yaml
vcl_c4_b9_score_vs_runoff	method_comparisons/valuable_condorcet_loser/cases/	1	The valuable Condorcet loser — Score elects her, the runoff rejects her → Ben	.yaml
wcl_c3_b5_star	method_comparisons/weak_condorcet_loser/cases/	1	Weak Condorcet loser — STAR elects a candidate who beats nobody → Ben	.yaml

RCV-IRV (Hare) (49)

Case (page)	Folder	Winners	Title / expected	src
RCV_ballot_example	06_Other/RCV_IRV/cases/	1	RCV-IRV — a basic ranked-ballot example (3 candidates) → A	.yaml
batch_all_out_condorcet_c3_b3	06_Other/RCV_IRV/cases/	1	Batch elimination empties the field — with a Condorcet winner sitting there → Amy	.yaml
batch_all_out_cycle_c3_b3	06_Other/RCV_IRV/cases/	1	Batch elimination empties the field — the perfect cycle → Amy	.yaml
batch_all_out_round2_c4_b6	06_Other/RCV_IRV/cases/	1	The field empties in round two — and Pareto is what keeps Dev out of the tie → Alex	.yaml
put_two_universes_c3_b4	06_Other/RCV_IRV/cases/	1	Parallel universes — one count, two legal answers → Anna	.yaml
street_trees_five_rounds_c6_b100	06_Other/RCV_IRV/cases/	1	Street trees — five rounds, and the bar keeps dropping → Birch	.yaml
balance_base_irv_c3_b9	06_Other/RCV_IRV/equal_vote_balance/cases/	1	Equal-vote balance — base (IRV elects the Condorcet winner, Bruno) → Bruno	.yaml
balance_plus_opposite_c3_b15	06_Other/RCV_IRV/equal_vote_balance/cases/	1	Equal-vote balance — plus 3 opposite pairs (IRV flips to Ada) → Ada	.yaml
burlington_2009_irv	method_comparisons/burlington_2009/cases/	1	Burlington 2009 mayor — RCV-IRV: the real center squeeze (Kiss wins, the Condorcet winner is third) → Kiss	.yaml
burlington_2009_raise_kiss_nonmono	method_comparisons/burlington_2009/cases/	1	Burlington 2009, the raise — 750 Wright voters rank Kiss first, and Kiss loses → Montroll	.yaml
center_squeeze_irv	method_comparisons/center_squeeze/cases/	1	Center squeeze (RCV-IRV) — minimal 27-voter case (the moderate is eliminated) → Left	.yaml
alaska_buried_c3_b200	method_comparisons/condorcet_burial_alaska/cases/	1	Alaska 2022 (Begich buried) — a manufactured cycle; margin methods resist, TTR/Hare doesn't → Peltola	.yaml
alaska_sincere_c3_b200	method_comparisons/condorcet_burial_alaska/cases/	1	Alaska 2022 (sincere) — Begich is the Condorcet winner → Peltola	.yaml
crowded_field_c3_irv	method_comparisons/crowded_field/cases/	1	Crowded field, rung 3 — 3 candidates, 65 voters, counted by RCV-IRV → Diego	.yaml
crowded_field_c5_irv	method_comparisons/crowded_field/cases/	1	Crowded field, rung 5 — 5 candidates, 65 voters, counted by RCV-IRV → Elsa	.yaml
crowded_field_c7_irv	method_comparisons/crowded_field/cases/	1	Crowded field, rung 7 — 7 candidates, 65 voters, counted by RCV-IRV → Clara	.yaml
cycle_vote_on_the_rule_irv_c5_b999	method_comparisons/cycle_resolution/cases/	1	Best Cycle-Breaking Rule — a society votes on how to break a cycle, and cycles → Ranked Pairs	.yaml
bv2227_3xgkck_honest_irv	method_comparisons/favorite_betrayal_irv/cases/	1	Favorite betrayal (RCV-IRV) — HONEST: Left voters rank their favorite first, and their WORST wins → Right	.yaml
bv2228_bgcmxx_betray_irv	method_comparisons/favorite_betrayal_irv/cases/	1	Favorite betrayal (RCV-IRV) — BETRAY: 2 Left voters rank their favorite SECOND, and win → Center	.yaml
coombs_ex18_monotonicity	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Coombs Ex.18 — Bree is raised on four ballots and loses because of it → Arlo	.yaml
coombs_ex20_amalgamated	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Coombs Ex.20 — amalgamated: both districts chose B, their union chooses A → B	.yaml
coombs_ex20_district1	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Coombs Ex.20 — District I: 34 voters, Coombs elects B → B	.yaml
coombs_ex20_district2	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Coombs Ex.20 — District II: 7 voters, B wins outright → B	.yaml
coombs_ex21_twin_after	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Coombs Ex.21 — after: two twins join for B, and B's win becomes a coin flip → B	.yaml
coombs_ex21_twin_before	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Coombs Ex.21 — before: 20 voters, Coombs elects B outright → B	.yaml
coombs_ex22_scc	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Coombs Ex.22 — SCC: C drops out and A wins instead of B → A	.yaml
bv2277_tqfdbg_mayor_irv	method_comparisons/kissel_single_elimination_rcv/cases/	1	The mayor's race (RCV-IRV, full rounds) — Cora comes from third and wins → Cora	.yaml
bv2278_8cdkkc_five_way_irv	method_comparisons/kissel_single_elimination_rcv/cases/	1	Kissel's five-way example (RCV-IRV) — the compromise is eliminated third → A	.yaml
minneapolis_2017_irv	method_comparisons/minneapolis_2017/cases/	1	Minneapolis 2017 Mayor — 105,928 real ballots, and IRV lands on the Condorcet winner → Jacob Frey	.yaml
alaska_upward_after	method_comparisons/monotonicity/cases/	1	Upward monotonicity (Alaska 2022) — AFTER: raise the winner, she loses → Begich	.yaml
alaska_upward_before	method_comparisons/monotonicity/cases/	1	Upward monotonicity (Alaska 2022) — BEFORE: Peltola wins → Peltola	.yaml
monotonicity_irv_after	method_comparisons/monotonicity/cases/	1	Non-monotonicity (RCV-IRV) — part 2: raising X makes X lose → Z	.yaml
monotonicity_irv_before	method_comparisons/monotonicity/cases/	1	Non-monotonicity (RCV-IRV) — part 1: baseline, X wins → X	.yaml
sf_d7_downward_after	method_comparisons/monotonicity/cases/	1	Downward monotonicity (San Francisco D7 2020) — AFTER: rank the loser lower, he wins → Engardio	.yaml
sf_d7_downward_before	method_comparisons/monotonicity/cases/	1	Downward monotonicity (San Francisco D7 2020) — BEFORE: Melgar wins → Melgar	.yaml
bv2158_gr72hd_ossipoff_centrist_irv	method_comparisons/paradoxes_and_whoops/cases/	1	IRV buries the centrist — Ossipoff's 303-voter one-dimensional example (BV2158)	.yaml
bv2159_f4cjpy_brams_irv_pathologies	method_comparisons/paradoxes_and_whoops/cases/	1	Many IRV pathologies in one election — Brams' 21-voter sampler (BV2159)	.yaml
bv2183_dfw8rj_forced_exhaustion_ceiling	method_comparisons/paradoxes_and_whoops/cases/	1	BV2183 — Forced Exhaustion Ceiling (RCV-IRV, 2-rank cap) → Ada	.yaml
bv2132_ykjjhy_pet_irv	method_comparisons/pet_poll_four_methods/cases/	1	BV2132 — Pet poll (RCV-IRV): center squeeze elects Fish → Fish	.yaml
bv2133_dyxrbr_pet2_irv	method_comparisons/pet_poll_four_winners/cases/	1	BV2133 — Pet poll II (RCV-IRV): transfers elect Fish → Fish	.yaml
bv2281_qycpbx_ossipoff_irv	method_comparisons/rangevoting_irv_examples/cases/	1	Ossipoff's 303 — the first-round LEADER is eliminated → D	.yaml
bv2282_hf3ckp_brams_irv	method_comparisons/rangevoting_irv_examples/cases/	1	Brams 1982 — twenty-one voters, and the Condorcet winner goes out second → B	.yaml
reversal_irv_original	method_comparisons/reversal_symmetry/cases/	1	Reversal symmetry — RCV-IRV, original: A wins (best) → A	.yaml
reversal_irv_reversed	method_comparisons/reversal_symmetry/cases/	1	Reversal symmetry — RCV-IRV, reversed: A wins AGAIN (worst = best) → A	.yaml
bv2222_rfyk46_510_thin_irv	method_comparisons/star_5_1_0_challenge/cases/	1	RCV-IRV on the same electorate — also squeezes the center (→ Ana) → Ana	.yaml
bv2223_dyh93j_510_real_irv	method_comparisons/star_5_1_0_challenge/cases/	1	RCV-IRV, real moderate base — still squeezes the center (→ Ana) → Ana	.yaml
irv_combined	method_comparisons/summability_demo/cases/	1	Summability demo — RCV-IRV combined A+B (B eliminated; not summable) → A	.yaml
irv_district_A	method_comparisons/summability_demo/cases/	1	Summability demo — RCV-IRV district A (B wins) → B	.yaml
irv_district_B	method_comparisons/summability_demo/cases/	1	Summability demo — RCV-IRV district B (B wins) → B	.yaml

Ranked Robin (RCV-RR / Copeland) (100)

Case (page)	Folder	Winners	Title / expected	src
ex09_game_night_cycle	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 9 — Game night: nobody is unbeatable (a Ranked Robin ladder drill) → Azul	.yaml
ranked_robin_consensus_center	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/cases/	1	Ranked Robin (RCV-RR) — the consensus center wins the round-robin → Ben	.yaml
ranked_robin_intro_c3_b7	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/cases/	1	Ranked Robin (RCV-RR) — the smallest round-robin that shows the report → Ben	.yaml
rr_blank_is_last_c4_b3	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/cases/	1	Ranked Robin — a blank is ranked LAST (and rank numbers don't matter) → Ada	.yaml
01_condorcet_winner	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/condorcet_vs_ranked_robin/cases/	1	Condorcet winner exists — Ranked Robin elects it → Ada	.yaml
02_cycle_no_condorcet	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/condorcet_vs_ranked_robin/cases/	1	No Condorcet winner (a cycle) — Ranked Robin still elects one → Ada	.yaml
04_smith_set_c4_b7	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/condorcet_vs_ranked_robin/cases/	1	The Smith set — the smallest club that beats everyone outside it → Ada	.yaml
bv2140_48hjkv_most_pairwise_wins	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/condorcet_vs_ranked_robin/cases/	1	BV2140 — Ranked Robin worked example: most pairwise wins, no Condorcet winner (electowiki) → Ava	.yaml
rr_vs_mwsl_cycle_c3_b32	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/consensus_choice_divergence/cases/	1	Ranked Robin vs Consensus Choice — the same cycle, two different winners → Ana	.yaml
copeland_half_credit_decides	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/copeland_score/cases/	1	Ranked Robin — the half-point for a draw decides the election (LH-only) → Alice	.yaml
bgg9qh9_most_wins_is_not_condorcet	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/most_wins_vs_condorcet/cases/	1	Ranked Robin — winning the most matchups does NOT make you the Condorcet winner → Cora	.yaml
bv2131_tennessee_condorcet_center_vqyqkr	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/rr_vs_irv_plurality/cases/	1	BV2131 — Tennessee capital: Ranked Robin elects the Condorcet center (Nashville) → Nashville	.yaml
bv2208_7q6by8_burial_sincere	05_Ranked_Robin/03_Criteria/burial/cases/	1	BV2208 — Burial in Ranked Robin (1/2): sincere ballots, Beryl beats everyone → Beryl	.yaml
bv2209_fxhw6g_burial_pays	05_Ranked_Robin/03_Criteria/burial/cases/	1	BV2209 — Burial in Ranked Robin (2/2): fifteen voters rank the leader last, and it pays → Amber	.yaml
bv2142_4gfwdq_clone_cycle_pre	05_Ranked_Robin/03_Criteria/clone_independence/cases/	1	BV2142 — Ranked Robin clone independence (1/2): a no-Condorcet cycle, LH vs BV tiebreak → A	.yaml
bv2143_9pr3wr_teaming_fails	05_Ranked_Robin/03_Criteria/clone_independence/cases/	1	BV2143 — Ranked Robin clone independence (2/2): teaming succeeds on LH, FAILS on BV → A1	.yaml
clone_teaming_01_pre	05_Ranked_Robin/03_Criteria/clone_independence/cases/	1	Clone independence (1/2) — before cloning: A, B, C tie in a cycle → A	.yaml
clone_teaming_02_post	05_Ranked_Robin/03_Criteria/clone_independence/cases/	1	Clone independence (2/2) — teaming: A runs clones and turns a coin flip into a win → A1	.yaml
bv2141_3r3yf7_four_degree_tie	05_Ranked_Robin/03_Criteria/rr_tiebreaks/cases/	1	BV2141 — a Copeland tie that needs all four Equal-Vote tiebreak degrees (electowiki) → Ava	.yaml
bv2261_y2fbpc_tiebreak_recorded_cycle	05_Ranked_Robin/03_Criteria/rr_tiebreaks/cases/	1	BV2261 race 2 — a Condorcet cycle: every pair has a winner, and the tiebreak is still recorded → Anika	.yaml
bv2261_y2fbpc_tiebreak_recorded_draws	05_Ranked_Robin/03_Criteria/rr_tiebreaks/cases/	1	BV2261 race 1 — a perfectly balanced electorate: every pair draws, the tiebreak is recorded → Anika	.yaml
bv2262_2gvwr9_nine_way_dead_heat	05_Ranked_Robin/03_Criteria/rr_tiebreaks/cases/	1	BV2262 — nine candidates, a nine-way dead heat: the recorded tiebreak still pins the winner → Boris	.yaml
bv2270_8h4bvh_head_to_head_vs_margin	05_Ranked_Robin/03_Criteria/rr_tiebreaks/cases/	1	BV2270 — a two-way Copeland tie where LH and BetterVoting elect DIFFERENT candidates → Birch	.yaml
dead_heat_lot_tiebreak	05_Ranked_Robin/03_Criteria/rr_tiebreaks/cases/	1	Ranked Robin — a dead heat that runs the whole tiebreak ladder (LH-only) → Ada	.yaml
BV_Library_ranked_robin_single_winner	method_comparisons/BV_Library/cases/	1	BV parity — Ranked Robin: Condorcet winner (equal ranks allowed) → Alice	.yaml
BV_Library_ranked_robin_ties	method_comparisons/BV_Library/cases/	1	BV parity — Ranked Robin: Copeland tie broken by tiebreak order → Alice	.yaml
hh41_02_preferences_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/approval_majority_criterion/cases/	1	Hamlin & Hua §4.1 — the assumed preferences, counted pairwise: A is the Condorcet winner → A	.yaml
bv2280_37yf8x_rr_full	method_comparisons/ballot_expressiveness/cases/	1	Nine candidates, 25 voters — ranking all nine, counted by Ranked Robin → Finn	.yaml
bv2280_37yf8x_rr_top5	method_comparisons/ballot_expressiveness/cases/	1	Nine candidates, 25 voters — ranking only five, counted by Ranked Robin → Gus	.yaml
condorcet_1788_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/borda_condorcet_1788/cases/	1	Condorcet's 1788 rebuttal to Borda — the ranked profile, counted pairwise → Peter	.yaml
burlington_2009_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/burlington_2009/cases/	1	Burlington 2009 mayor — Ranked Robin: Montroll, a perfect 5-0 Condorcet winner → Montroll	.yaml
bv2137_ywckmg_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/center_squeeze_bv2137/cases/	1	Center Squeeze — Ranked Robin (Copeland): the Condorcet winner survives → Anderson	.yaml
margins_paper_exact_304	method_comparisons/copeland_vs_borda_margins/cases/	1	Margins matter — the textbook profile at its printed size (304 ballots, LH-only) → b	.yaml
margins_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/copeland_vs_borda_margins/cases/	1	Margins matter — Ranked Robin (Copeland) ties all three → Berry	.yaml
crowded_field_c3_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/crowded_field/cases/	1	Crowded field, rung 3 — 3 candidates, 65 voters, counted by Ranked Robin → Diego	.yaml
crowded_field_c5_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/crowded_field/cases/	1	Crowded field, rung 5 — 5 candidates, 65 voters, counted by Ranked Robin → Diego	.yaml
crowded_field_c7_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/crowded_field/cases/	1	Crowded field, rung 7 — 7 candidates, 65 voters, counted by Ranked Robin → Diego	.yaml
cycle_copeland_ties_c4_b21	method_comparisons/cycle_resolution/cases/	1	A cycle Copeland can't break — three trails tie 1-1, and the refined rules all rescue Alder → Alder	.yaml
cycle_family_splits_c5_b77	method_comparisons/cycle_resolution/cases/	1	The whole Condorcet family splits — Minimax & Schulze pick Ava, Ranked Pairs picks Ben, on one set of ballots → Ava	.yaml
cycle_schulze_vs_ranked_pairs_c4_b40	method_comparisons/cycle_resolution/cases/	1	Same ballots, different Condorcet rule — Schulze says Ana, Ranked Pairs says Bruno, Split Cycle says both → Ana	.yaml
cycle_vote_on_the_rule_rr_c5_b999	method_comparisons/cycle_resolution/cases/	1	Best Cycle-Breaking Rule — the cycle itself, and who each rule crowns → Schulze Method	.yaml
bv2145_6fj2kg_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.2 — Ranked Robin: the Condorcet winner survives → Ada	.yaml
bv2146_krk2px_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.2 after the raise — Ranked Robin: unmoved, still Ada → Ada	.yaml
bv2150_dxg8pb_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.4 full electorate — Ranked Robin: the Condorcet winner Beth → Beth	.yaml
bv2151_97hbpw_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.4 after two no-shows — Ranked Robin: unmoved, still Beth → Beth	.yaml
bv2152_r6ctvy_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.5 — Ranked Robin: the Condorcet winner Bert → Bert	.yaml
bv2153_pcttmr_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.7 — Ranked Robin: the Condorcet winner Amos → Amos	.yaml
bv2154_wq6yv7_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.8 — Ranked Robin: the Condorcet winner Bruce → Bruce	.yaml
bv2162_4htk44_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Nurmi Ex.16 sincere — Ranked Robin: the Condorcet winner B → B	.yaml
bv2163_74j6vv_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Nurmi Ex.16 truncated — Ranked Robin: unmoved, still B → B	.yaml
bv2164_xbqq8t_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Coombs Ex.17 — Ranked Robin: the Condorcet winner Arlo → Arlo	.yaml
felsenthal_ex6_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.6 — Ranked Robin: the Pareto-dominant Condorcet winner Aria (LH-only) → Aria	.yaml
minimax_ex30_noshow_after	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Minimax Ex.30 — after: three C>A>B>D voters stay home, Minimax elects A → D	.yaml
minimax_ex30_noshow_before	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Minimax Ex.30 — before: all 19 vote, Minimax elects B → A	.yaml
minimax_ex31_truncation	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Minimax Ex.31 — truncation: the same 19 voters, four ballots cut to their top two → A	.yaml
minimax_ex32_amalgamated	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Minimax Ex.32 — amalgamated: both districts elected D, together they cannot → B	.yaml
minimax_ex32_district2	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Minimax Ex.32 — District II: three voters, D wins outright → D	.yaml
minimax_ex33_scc	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Minimax Ex.33 — SCC: drop a loser and the winner changes → D	.yaml
succ_elim_ex10_amalgamated	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Successive elimination Ex.10 — amalgamated: every round ties, and the tie-break picks the winner → C	.yaml
succ_elim_ex10_district1	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Successive elimination Ex.10 — District I: three voters, the agenda elects C → B	.yaml
succ_elim_ex10_district2	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Successive elimination Ex.10 — District II: a single voter, C wins → C	.yaml
succ_elim_ex11_twin_after	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Successive elimination Ex.11 — after: a twin joins and costs their own side the win → B	.yaml
succ_elim_ex11_twin_before	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Successive elimination Ex.11 — before: six voters, the agenda elects C → B	.yaml
succ_elim_ex12_sincere	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Successive elimination Ex.12 — sincere: the A>B>C>D voter gets their last choice → C	.yaml
succ_elim_ex12_truncated	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Successive elimination Ex.12 — truncated: naming only A turns last place into first → C	.yaml
succ_elim_ex9_noshow	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Successive elimination Ex.9 — two D voters stay home and get a better result → A	.yaml
succ_elim_ex9_pareto	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Successive elimination Ex.9 — the agenda elects B, whom every voter ranks below A → A	.yaml
bv2275_6mcgkq_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/kim_ordinal_vs_cardinal/cases/	1	Kim (A,B)-scoring — the ranking alone (Ranked Robin reference) → Almond	.yaml
bv2277_tqfdbg_mayor_rr	method_comparisons/kissel_single_elimination_rcv/cases/	1	The mayor's race (Ranked Robin) — Cora beats everyone head-to-head → Cora	.yaml
bv2278_8cdkkc_five_way_rr	method_comparisons/kissel_single_elimination_rcv/cases/	1	Kissel's five-way example (Ranked Robin) — the same ballots elect C → C	.yaml
bv2279_qywq7d_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/majoritarian_vs_utilitarian/cases/	1	Three brothers, one fruit — Ranked Robin confirms the majoritarian winner → Banana	.yaml
p3_manip_compromise_rr	method_comparisons/manipulability_p3/cases/	1	P3 manipulated — the mild version: three adjacent swaps, no burial, same result → Dublin	.yaml
p3_manip_reversal_rr	method_comparisons/manipulability_p3/cases/	1	P3 manipulated — Zwicker's complete reversal makes Dublin a 4-0 Condorcet winner → Dublin	.yaml
p3_sincere_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/manipulability_p3/cases/	1	P3 sincere — Ranked Robin elects Edinburgh (the baseline every manipulation attacks) → Edinburgh	.yaml
tilted_cycle_c3_b5_rr	method_comparisons/minimal_tilted_cycle/cases/	1	Minimal tilted cycle — 5 voters, margins 3–1–1 (Ranked Robin) → Ada	.yaml
minneapolis_2017_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/minneapolis_2017/cases/	1	Minneapolis 2017 Mayor — the head-to-head check: right winner, wrong runner-up → Jacob Frey	.yaml
bv2138_cxrf8v_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/no_condorcet_bv2138/cases/	1	No Condorcet Winner — Ranked Robin (Copeland): a tie LH and BV break differently → Abby	.yaml
pets_gov_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/pets_governance/cases/	1	Pets Governance — Mayor by Ranked Robin (1 seat): the Condorcet winner → Dog	.yaml
bv2176_p8dp28_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/postit_rcv_example/cases/	1	The Post-it RCV example (20 voters) — Ranked Robin: a cycle, a 2-1 tie, and two ladders → Blue	.yaml
bv2178_8kg698_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/postit_rcv_example/cases/	1	The Post-it switch, made real — Ranked Robin: Blue, now the outright Condorcet winner → Blue	.yaml
bv2281_qycpbx_ossipoff_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/rangevoting_irv_examples/cases/	1	Ossipoff's 303 — Ranked Robin on the identical ballots → C	.yaml
bv2282_hf3ckp_brams_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/rangevoting_irv_examples/cases/	1	Brams 1982 — Ranked Robin on the identical ballots → G	.yaml
reinf_combined_ben_c3_b9_rr	method_comparisons/reinforcement_paradox/cases/	1	Reinforcement — Combined, Ben branch (9 voters; both halves say Ben, the whole says Ada) → Ada	.yaml
reinf_combined_c3_b9_rr	method_comparisons/reinforcement_paradox/cases/	1	Reinforcement — combined 9 voters, counted by Ranked Robin (Cara wins) → Cara	.yaml
reinf_combined_cara_c3_b9_rr	method_comparisons/reinforcement_paradox/cases/	1	Reinforcement — Combined, Cara branch (9 voters; both halves say Cara, the whole says Ben) → Ben	.yaml
reinf_north_c3_b6_rr	method_comparisons/reinforcement_paradox/cases/	1	Reinforcement — North district alone (6 voters, a perfect cycle) → Ada	.yaml
reinf_south_ben_c3_b3_rr	method_comparisons/reinforcement_paradox/cases/	1	Reinforcement — South district, Ben branch (3 voters, Ben is the clear Condorcet winner) → Ben	.yaml
reinf_south_c3_b3_rr	method_comparisons/reinforcement_paradox/cases/	1	Reinforcement — South district alone (3 voters, Ada is the clear Condorcet winner) → Ada	.yaml
reinf_south_cara_c3_b3_rr	method_comparisons/reinforcement_paradox/cases/	1	Reinforcement — South district, Cara branch (3 voters, Cara is the clear Condorcet winner) → Cara	.yaml
same_matrix_p1_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/same_matrix_different_plurality/cases/	1	Same matrix, different plurality — electorate P1: Ranked Robin → Ben	.yaml
same_matrix_p2_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/same_matrix_different_plurality/cases/	1	Same matrix, different plurality — electorate P2: Ranked Robin → Ben	.yaml
same_matrix_p3_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/same_matrix_different_plurality/cases/	1	Same matrix, different plurality — electorate P3: Ranked Robin → Ben	.yaml
split_cycle_schulze_spoiler_c5_b40	method_comparisons/split_cycle/cases/	1	A candidate nobody prefers still flips the winner — Schulze's spoiler, and Split Cycle's immunity → Cascade	.yaml
rr_combined	method_comparisons/summability_demo/cases/	1	Summability demo — Combined (A+B), counted by Ranked Robin → B	.yaml
rr_district_A	method_comparisons/summability_demo/cases/	1	Summability demo — District A, counted by Ranked Robin → B	.yaml
rr_district_B	method_comparisons/summability_demo/cases/	1	Summability demo — District B, counted by Ranked Robin → B	.yaml
bv2170_pp2q4q_ranked_robin	method_comparisons/symmetric_centrist_bv2170/cases/	1	Symmetric centrist (47/47/3/3) — Ranked Robin: elects Casey, beats everyone head-to-head → Casey	.yaml
copeland_vs_clones_c5_b3	method_comparisons/tournament_solutions/cases/	1	Copeland picks one, composition-consistency demands all five (tournament solutions) → D	.yaml
five_answers_one_election_c4_b3	method_comparisons/tournament_solutions/cases/	1	Five defensible answers, one three-ballot election (tournament solutions) → B	.yaml
bv2210_fvg8y8_bloc_rr_sweep	method_comparisons/food_truck_row/cases/	2	Food-Truck Row — Bloc Ranked Robin: ranked ballots sweep too → Arepa, Bao	.yaml

Approval (25)

Case (page)	Folder	Winners	Title / expected	src
ex13_approve3	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 13 — Where do you draw the line? Approve 3 and up → Ash	.yaml
ex13_approve4	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 13 — Where do you draw the line? Approve 4 and up → Beck	.yaml
ex13_bullet	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 13 — Where do you draw the line? Favorites only → Cora	.yaml
ex15_approval_yes_no	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	1	Exercise 15a — a Yes/No profile (which method is this?) → Blair	.yaml
approval_101_c3_b5	04_Approval/02_Examples/cases/	1	Approval 101 — most approvals wins → Bob	.yaml
BV_Library_approval_single_winner	method_comparisons/BV_Library/cases/	1	BV parity — Approval: most approvals wins (single winner) → Dave	.yaml
hh41_01_approval_as_printed	method_comparisons/approval_majority_criterion/cases/	1	Hamlin & Hua §4.1 — the approval count as printed: B wins with 100% → B	.yaml
hh41_05_majority_bullet_votes	method_comparisons/approval_majority_criterion/cases/	1	Hamlin & Hua §4.1 — the majority bullet-votes instead: A wins, same electorate → A	.yaml
Black_Curtain_01a_c3_b5_approval	method_comparisons/black_curtain/cases/	1	The Black Curtain → Bob	.yaml
chicken_approval	method_comparisons/chicken_dilemma/cases/	1	Chicken / Burr dilemma — Approval, honest: A and B tie 60-60 (the trap) → A	.yaml
crowded_field_c3_approval	method_comparisons/crowded_field/cases/	1	Crowded field, rung 3 — 3 candidates, 65 voters, counted by Approval → Diego	.yaml
crowded_field_c5_approval	method_comparisons/crowded_field/cases/	1	Crowded field, rung 5 — 5 candidates, 65 voters, counted by Approval → Diego	.yaml
crowded_field_c7_approval	method_comparisons/crowded_field/cases/	1	Crowded field, rung 7 — 7 candidates, 65 voters, counted by Approval → Felix	.yaml
bv2152_r6ctvy_approval	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.5 — Approval: the Condorcet winner loses the approval count → Anna	.yaml
bv2153_pcttmr_approval	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.7 — Approval: a majority's first choice loses → Bella	.yaml
bv2154_wq6yv7_approval	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.8 — Approval: the absolute loser wins on one strategic ballot → April	.yaml
felsenthal_ex6_pareto_approval	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.6 — Approval can elect a Pareto-dominated candidate (LH-only) → Beau	.yaml
hillinger_t3_arbitrariness	method_comparisons/hillinger_evaluative_voting/cases/	1	Hillinger Table 3 — one approval result, two opposite Borda winners → Ada	.yaml
bv2275_6mcgkq_approval_intense	method_comparisons/kim_ordinal_vs_cardinal/cases/	1	Kim (A,B)-scoring, A=0/B=1 — Approval, when second choices are intense → Berry	.yaml
bv2275_6mcgkq_approval_lukewarm	method_comparisons/kim_ordinal_vs_cardinal/cases/	1	Kim (A,B)-scoring, A=0/B=1 — Approval, when second choices are lukewarm → Almond	.yaml
bv2279_qywq7d_approval	method_comparisons/majoritarian_vs_utilitarian/cases/	1	Three brothers, one fruit — Approval lands on the utilitarian winner → Orange	.yaml
bv2132_ykjjhy_pet_approval	method_comparisons/pet_poll_four_methods/cases/	1	BV2132 — Pet poll (Approval): broad support elects Cat → Cat	.yaml
bv2133_dyxrbr_pet2_approval	method_comparisons/pet_poll_four_winners/cases/	1	BV2133 — Pet poll II (Approval): broad support elects Bird → Bird	.yaml
bv2177_v8r66y_approval	method_comparisons/postit_rcv_example/cases/	1	The Post-it election, seven ways — Approval: Pink, if approving means any support → Pink	.yaml
wcl_c3_b5_approval	method_comparisons/weak_condorcet_loser/cases/	1	Weak Condorcet loser — the same five voters, on Approval ballots → Ben	.yaml

STV (proportional RCV) (10)

Case (page)	Folder	Winners	Title / expected	src
bv2205_8xwx43_minimal_sole_survivor	06_Other/STV/bv_stv_sole_survivor_crash/cases/	1	BV2205 — The smallest sole-survivor STV election (1 seat, 6 voters) → Ash	.yaml
bv2137_ywckmg_stv	method_comparisons/center_squeeze_bv2137/cases/	1	Center Squeeze — STV (1 seat = IRV single-winner): same squeeze → Carter	.yaml
bv2138_cxrf8v_stv	method_comparisons/no_condorcet_bv2138/cases/	1	No Condorcet Winner — STV (1 seat = IRV single-winner): Dave → Dave	.yaml
ex14_two_novels	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	2	Exercise 14 — The transfer machine: a book club buys two novels (STV) → Austen, Camus	.yaml
ex14_two_novels_fullranks	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	2	Exercise 14 — The transfer machine, fully ranked (BV probe variant) → Austen, Camus	.yaml
bv2203_gvtg2h_flag_probe	06_Other/STV/bv_stv_sole_survivor_crash/cases/	2	BV2203 — The transfer machine, flag probe (STV 2 seats, write-in key omitted) → Austen, Camus	.yaml
bv2204_39py93_control_standing_hopefuls	06_Other/STV/bv_stv_sole_survivor_crash/cases/	2	BV2204 — Poets on the shelf: the control (STV 2 seats, hopefuls still standing) → Angelou, Cummings	.yaml
bv2210_fvg8y8_stv_share	method_comparisons/food_truck_row/cases/	2	Food-Truck Row — STV: one seat per side → Arepa, Donut	.yaml
03a_stv_3seats	06_Other/STV/cases/	3	STV — 3 seats, 7 candidates (proportional RCV) → Housing, Schools, SmallBiz	.yaml
pets_gov_stv	method_comparisons/pets_governance/cases/	3	Pets Governance — Delegates by STV (3 seats): proportional again → Dog, Bird, Cat	.yaml

Bloc STAR (2)

Case (page)	Folder	Winners	Title / expected	src
min_bloc_c3_b2	method_comparisons/bloc_vs_pr/cases/	2	The smallest divergence — Bloc STAR → Ana, Ben	.yaml
blocs_bloc_c9_b10	method_comparisons/bloc_vs_pr/cases/	3	Left, Centre, Right — Bloc STAR fills the council	.yaml

STAR-PR (Sequential Selection) (8)

Case (page)	Folder	Winners	Title / expected	src
three_neighbors_sss	03_STAR_PR/02_Examples/method_divergences/cases/	2	Three neighbors, two seats — Sequentially Spent Score → Ana, Cleo	.yaml
two_officers_sss	03_STAR_PR/02_Examples/method_divergences/cases/	2	Two officers, three candidates — Sequentially Spent Score → Dana, Finn	.yaml
free_ride_honest_sss	03_STAR_PR/03_Criteria/free_riding/cases/	2	Free riding — honest baseline (SSS) → Anika, Bruno	.yaml
free_ride_hylland_sss	03_STAR_PR/03_Criteria/free_riding/cases/	2	Free riding — the free ride (SSS) → Anika, Camila	.yaml
two_bullet_voters_sss	03_STAR_PR/03_Criteria/vote_unitarity/cases/	2	Two bullet voters, two seats — Sequentially Spent Score → Amy, Cy	.yaml
02b_c5_b63_proportional-sss	03_STAR_PR/02_Examples/cases/	3	Proportional STAR — Sequentially Spent Score → Alice, Ben, Dan	.yaml
03b_star_pr_3seats	03_STAR_PR/02_Examples/cases/	3	Proportional STAR — same 3-seat electorate as the STV demo → Housing, Schools, SmallBiz	.yaml
coop_board_scores_sss	method_comparisons/proportional_ballots/cases/	3	Co-op board — 0–5 score ballot, sss → Ben, Chris, Dana	.yaml

Reweighted Range (6)

Case (page)	Folder	Winners	Title / expected	src
three_neighbors_rrv	03_STAR_PR/02_Examples/method_divergences/cases/	2	Three neighbors, two seats — Reweighted Range Voting → Ana, Cleo	.yaml
two_officers_rrv	03_STAR_PR/02_Examples/method_divergences/cases/	2	Two officers, three candidates — Reweighted Range Voting → Dana, Eli	.yaml
free_ride_honest_rrv	03_STAR_PR/03_Criteria/free_riding/cases/	2	Free riding — honest baseline (RRV) → Anika, Bruno	.yaml
free_ride_hylland_rrv	03_STAR_PR/03_Criteria/free_riding/cases/	2	Free riding — the free ride fails (RRV) → Anika, Bruno	.yaml
02c_c5_b63_proportional-rrv	03_STAR_PR/02_Examples/cases/	3	Proportional — Reweighted Range Voting → Alice, Ben, Dan	.yaml
lackner_skowron_shadow_star_pr_rrv_c7_b12	03_STAR_PR/02_Examples/cases/	4	Shadow STAR-PR (RRV) — Lackner & Skowron's running example (k=4) — matches PAV → A, B, C, F	.yaml

Allocated Score (STAR-PR) (27)

Case (page)	Folder	Winners	Title / expected	src
ex12_proportional_share	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	2	Exercise 12 — Two seats, one neighborhood: Allocated Score shares → Asa, Cleo	.yaml
three_neighbors_allocated	03_STAR_PR/02_Examples/method_divergences/cases/	2	Three neighbors, two seats — Allocated Score → Bo, Cleo	.yaml
two_officers_allocated	03_STAR_PR/02_Examples/method_divergences/cases/	2	Two officers, three candidates — Allocated Score → Dana, Finn	.yaml
alabama_2seats	03_STAR_PR/03_Criteria/alabama_paradox/cases/	2	The Alabama paradox — 2 seats	.yaml
bkk2gxj_fractional_surplus	03_STAR_PR/03_Criteria/bv_fixture_crosscheck/cases/	2	BV fixture — fractional surplus → Allison, Doug	.yaml
free_ride_arms_race_allocated	03_STAR_PR/03_Criteria/free_riding/cases/	2	Free riding — both sides ride, nobody gains → Anika, Bruno	.yaml
free_ride_honest_allocated	03_STAR_PR/03_Criteria/free_riding/cases/	2	Free riding — honest baseline (Allocated Score) → Anika, Bruno	.yaml
free_ride_hylland_allocated	03_STAR_PR/03_Criteria/free_riding/cases/	2	Free riding — the free ride (Allocated Score) → Anika, Camila	.yaml
misjudged_queue_bury	03_STAR_PR/03_Criteria/free_riding/cases/	2	Misjudged queue — the free ride backfires → Boris, Cleo	.yaml
misjudged_queue_honest	03_STAR_PR/03_Criteria/free_riding/cases/	2	Misjudged queue — honest baseline → Amara, Boris	.yaml
misjudged_queue_hylland	03_STAR_PR/03_Criteria/free_riding/cases/	2	Misjudged queue — the free ride achieves nothing → Amara, Boris	.yaml
08_c6_b29_quota-circus-pr-2-seats	06_Other/ballot_style_lab/cases/	2	Quota Circus — STAR-PR with cliff, slate and gentle ballots (6 cand, 2 seats) → Amir, Bree	.yaml
BV_Library_star_pr_basic_two_seats	method_comparisons/BV_Library/cases/	2	BV parity — STAR_PR (Allocated Score): basic two-seat allocation → Allison, Doug	.yaml
BV_Library_star_pr_fractional_surplus	method_comparisons/BV_Library/cases/	2	BV parity — STAR_PR (Allocated Score): fractional surplus reweighting → Allison, Doug	.yaml
min_pr_c3_b2	method_comparisons/bloc_vs_pr/cases/	2	The smallest divergence — Proportional STAR (Allocated Score) → Ben, Cleo	.yaml
bv2210_fvg8y8_star_pr_share	method_comparisons/food_truck_row/cases/	2	Food-Truck Row — STAR-PR / Allocated Score: one seat per side → Arepa, Donut	.yaml
02a_c5_b63_proportional-allocated-score	03_STAR_PR/02_Examples/cases/	3	Proportional STAR — Allocated Score Voting → Alice, Ben, Dan	.yaml
alabama_3seats	03_STAR_PR/03_Criteria/alabama_paradox/cases/	3	The Alabama paradox — 3 seats	.yaml
bhk27tk_fewer_voters_than_seats	03_STAR_PR/03_Criteria/bv_fixture_crosscheck/cases/	3	BV fixture — fewer voters than seats → Allison, Bill, Carmen	.yaml
07b_c5_b36_herb-council-pr-3-seats	06_Other/ballot_style_lab/cases/	3	The Herb Garden Council — Allocated Score / STAR-PR, 3 seats (each quota seats someone) → Anise, Basil, Chive	.yaml
BV_Library_star_pr_voters_fewer_than_seats	method_comparisons/BV_Library/cases/	3	BV parity — STAR_PR (Allocated Score): fewer voters than seats → Allison, Bill, Carmen	.yaml
blocs_pr_c9_b10	method_comparisons/bloc_vs_pr/cases/	3	Left, Centre, Right — Proportional STAR fills the council	.yaml
pets_gov_star_pr	method_comparisons/pets_governance/cases/	3	Pets Governance — Council by STAR-PR (3 seats): minority earns a seat → Bird, Dog, Fish	.yaml
coop_board_scores_allocated	method_comparisons/proportional_ballots/cases/	3	Co-op board — 0–5 score ballot, allocated → Amy, Ben, Chris	.yaml
lackner_skowron_shadow_star_pr_c7_b12	03_STAR_PR/02_Examples/cases/	4	Shadow STAR-PR (Allocated Score) — Lackner & Skowron's running example (k=4) → A, B, C, D	.yaml
count_vs_weight_slates_c9_b66	03_STAR_PR/03_Criteria/allocated_count_vs_weight/cases/	5	Three slates, five seats — the count-vs-weight fingerprint → A1, A2, A3, B1, C1	.yaml
bv2130_presidential_board_star_pr	03_STAR_PR/02_Examples/cases/	7	BV2130 — Presidential Board Election (Proportional STAR = Allocated Score) → Bernie Sanders (Democrat), Al Gore (Democrat), Barack Obama (Democrat), Cornel West (Independent), Chase Oliver (Libertarian), Kamala Harris (Democrat), Karina Garcia (Socialism and Liberation)	.yaml

3-2-1 (1)

Case (page)	Folder	Winners	Title / expected	src
321_tennessee_blank_encoding_c4_b100	06_Other/three_two_one/cases/	1	Tennessee capital by 3-2-1 Voting (blank = Bad) → Nashville	.yaml

APPROVAL_MULTI_WINNER (7)

Case (page)	Folder	Winners	Title / expected	src
approval_bloc_2seats_c4_b6	04_Approval/02_Examples/multiwinner/cases/	2	Bloc Approval — 2 seats, majority sweep → Amy, Ben	.yaml
approval_sav_covers_everyone_c3_b17_brams_kilgour	04_Approval/02_Examples/multiwinner/cases/	2	SAV seats the pair that represents everybody; AV strands three voters → Ash, Bree	.yaml
approval_sav_disjoint_c4_b10_brams_kilgour	04_Approval/02_Examples/multiwinner/cases/	2	SAV vs AV — the same ballots elect two disjoint committees → Ada, Ben	.yaml
pets_gov_approval	method_comparisons/pets_governance/cases/	2	Pets Governance — Committee by Approval (2 seats): majority again → Dog, Cat	.yaml
approval_bloc_3seats_c6_b5	04_Approval/02_Examples/multiwinner/cases/	3	Bloc Approval — 3-seat city council at-large → Adams, Brown, Clark	.yaml
coop_board_approval	method_comparisons/proportional_ballots/cases/	3	Co-op board — Yes/No approval ballot (same nine voters) → Chris, Dana, Ella	.yaml
approval_bloc_4seats_c7_b12_lackner_skowron	04_Approval/02_Examples/multiwinner/cases/	4	Bloc Approval — Lackner & Skowron's running example (k=4) → A, B, C, D	.yaml

BLOC STAR (29)

Case (page)	Folder	Winners	Title / expected	src
ex12_bloc_sweep	01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/	2	Exercise 12 — Two seats, one neighborhood: Bloc STAR sweeps → Asa, Bram	.yaml
00_c3_b3_bloc-baseline-2-seats	02_STAR_Bloc/02_Examples/cases/	2	Bloc STAR baseline — 3 candidates, 2 seats (clean, no tiebreak) → Alice, Bruno	.yaml
01_c4_b2_bloc-star-2-seats	02_STAR_Bloc/02_Examples/cases/	2	Bloc STAR Voting: 2-Seat Committee Election → Don, Cal	.yaml
b484mbm_tie_every_rung	02_STAR_Bloc/02_Examples/cases/	2	3 candidates / 2 seats, Bloc STAR — tie at every rung (484mbm) → Blythe, Arden	.yaml
bloc_lot_path_dependence_a_c3_b5	02_STAR_Bloc/02_Examples/cases/	2	Bloc STAR — a seat-1 lot decides who wins seat 2 (lot A: Nadia first) → Nadia, Priya	.yaml
bloc_lot_path_dependence_b_c3_b5	02_STAR_Bloc/02_Examples/cases/	2	Bloc STAR — a seat-1 lot decides who wins seat 2 (lot B: Omar first) → Omar, Nadia	.yaml
bv129_score_tiebreak_bloc	02_STAR_Bloc/02_Examples/cases/	2	BV129 — Bloc STAR, 3 cand / 2 winners: seat 2 by the score tiebreaker → Carmen, Andre	.yaml
bv131_guido_bloc	02_STAR_Bloc/02_Examples/cases/	2	BV131 — Guido example (Bloc STAR): seat 1 is a hidden lot-decided tie → Cand2, Cand3	.yaml
bv132_verify_votes_bloc	02_STAR_Bloc/02_Examples/cases/	2	BV132 — verify number of votes cast (Bloc STAR, 2 seats) → C, B	.yaml
bv1815_bloc_3c2s_basic	02_STAR_Bloc/02_Examples/cases/	2	BV1815 — Bloc STAR, 3 candidates, 2 seats (seat 2 by score tiebreak) → A, C	.yaml
bv2105_r4dqvd_ice_cream_bloc	02_STAR_Bloc/02_Examples/cases/	2	BV2105 — Favorite ice cream (Bloc STAR, 2 seats): a partial ballot mis-filed as an abstention → Chocolate, Strawberry	.yaml
bv2105r2_w3vvff_ice_cream_recheck	02_STAR_Bloc/02_Examples/cases/	2	BV2105-r2 — Favorite ice cream (Bloc STAR, 2 seats): the partial ballot, re-counted a year later → Chocolate, Strawberry	.yaml
bv750_tie_breaking_bloc	02_STAR_Bloc/02_Examples/cases/	2	BV750 — Bloc STAR tie-breaking, every ballot identical (#1052 family) → c, a	.yaml
race_nobody_can_lose_two_seat_control	02_STAR_Bloc/02_Examples/cases/	2	A race nobody can lose — the two-seat control → Abby, Bruno	.yaml
bv2267_my9jd9_council_before_dane	02_STAR_Bloc/03_Criteria/committee_spoiler/cases/	2	BV2267 — Committee spoiler (1 of 2): three candidates, before a fourth runs → Cyrus, Ari	.yaml
bv2268_6m3gxq_spoiler_changes_council	02_STAR_Bloc/03_Criteria/committee_spoiler/cases/	2	BV2268 — Committee spoiler (2 of 2): a fourth candidate wins nothing and changes who does → Cyrus, Bea	.yaml
bv2264_j3hqvb_council_before_joiner	02_STAR_Bloc/03_Criteria/participation/cases/	2	BV2264 — Participation (1 of 2): the council six voters elect → Ada, Bruno	.yaml
bv2265_th3pbp_joiner_council_worse	02_STAR_Bloc/03_Criteria/participation/cases/	2	BV2265 — Participation (2 of 2): one more honest voter, and the council gets worse for them → Ada, Dov	.yaml
bv2266_k7pfqt_condorcet_winner_seated_second	02_STAR_Bloc/03_Criteria/seat_order/cases/	2	BV2266 — Seat order: the candidate who beats every rival is seated second → Dev, Anika	.yaml
bv2210_fvg8y8_bloc_star_sweep	method_comparisons/food_truck_row/cases/	2	Food-Truck Row — Bloc STAR: the same majority sweeps both seats → Arepa, Bao	.yaml
bv130_bloc_pagination_731	02_STAR_Bloc/02_Examples/cases/	3	BV130 — 6 candidates / 3 winners, Bloc STAR (original; star-server#731) → Someone I Like, Santa Claus, The Lesser Evil	.yaml
bv130r2_dead_rung_bloc	02_STAR_Bloc/02_Examples/cases/	3	BV130-r2 — 6 candidates / 3 winners, Bloc STAR (dead-rung lot tie; 9ff9jk) → Dan, Ada, Eve	.yaml
bv2269_t488h9_race_nobody_can_lose	02_STAR_Bloc/02_Examples/cases/	3	BV2269 — Three candidates, three seats: a race nobody can lose	.yaml
07a_c5_b36_herb-council-bloc-3-seats	06_Other/ballot_style_lab/cases/	3	The Herb Garden Council — Bloc STAR, 3 seats (the majority can sweep) → Basil, Chive, Dill	.yaml
pets_gov_bloc_star	method_comparisons/pets_governance/cases/	3	Pets Governance — Council by Bloc STAR (3 seats): majority sweeps → Dog, Fish, Cat	.yaml
bv1525_condorcet_loser_bloc	02_STAR_Bloc/02_Examples/cases/	4	BV1525 — 5 candidates / 4 winners, Bloc STAR (Condorcet-loser ties for seat 1) → First, Second, Third, Fourth	.yaml
bv1835_8h3yrx_score_leader_no_seat	02_STAR_Bloc/02_Examples/cases/	4	BV1835 — Bloc STAR, 100 voters, 4 seats: the score leader wins no seat → Bianca, Cedric, Deegan, Eli	.yaml
lackner_skowron_shadow_bloc_star_c7_b12	02_STAR_Bloc/02_Examples/cases/	4	Shadow STAR (Bloc) — Lackner & Skowron's running example (k=4) → A, B, C, D	.yaml
09_c7_b44_park-bloc-4-seats	06_Other/ballot_style_lab/cases/	4	Replant the Park — Bloc STAR with 7 trees, 4 seats, and wildcards → Dogwood, Aspen, Elm, Cedar	.yaml

CAV (1)

Case (page)	Folder	Winners	Title / expected	src
cav_library_board_c3_b12	06_Other/Combined_Approval/cases/	1	Library board by Combined Approval Voting — the newcomer nobody dislikes → Cleo	.yaml

IRV (19)

Case (page)	Folder	Winners	Title / expected	src
condorcet_1788_irv	method_comparisons/borda_condorcet_1788/cases/	1	Condorcet's 1788 rebuttal to Borda — RCV-IRV agrees here → Peter	.yaml
bv2137_ywckmg_irv	method_comparisons/center_squeeze_bv2137/cases/	1	Center Squeeze — IRV (Hare): the center gets squeezed out → Carter	.yaml
margins_irv	method_comparisons/copeland_vs_borda_margins/cases/	1	Margins matter — RCV-IRV elects the third answer (Cocoa) → Cocoa	.yaml
bv2145_6fj2kg_irv	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.2 — Runoff/IRV: the Condorcet winner is eliminated first → Ben	.yaml
bv2146_krk2px_irv	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.2 after the raise — Runoff/IRV: Ben loses by GAINING support → Ada	.yaml
bv2147_9gdrqg_irv	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.3 District I — Runoff/IRV: Bruno wins the runoff → Bruno	.yaml
bv2148_h87k6v_irv	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.3 District II — Runoff/IRV: Bruno wins in round one → Bruno	.yaml
bv2149_byk9v2_irv	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.3 Combined — Runoff/IRV: Bruno won both districts, Alma wins the whole → Alma	.yaml
bv2150_dxg8pb_irv	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.4 full electorate — Runoff/IRV: their worst choice wins → Carl	.yaml
bv2151_97hbpw_irv	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.4 after two no-shows — Runoff/IRV: the abstainers do better → Beth	.yaml
bv2153_pcttmr_irv	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.7 — IRV: the majority favorite wins round one → Amos	.yaml
bv2154_wq6yv7_irv	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.8 — IRV: a third winner, Clara → Clara	.yaml
bv2162_4htk44_irv	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Nurmi Ex.16 sincere — RCV-IRV: full rankings elect A, not the Condorcet winner → A	.yaml
bv2163_74j6vv_irv	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Nurmi Ex.16 truncated — RCV-IRV: ranking ONLY their favorite serves 17 voters better → B	.yaml
bv2138_cxrf8v_irv	method_comparisons/no_condorcet_bv2138/cases/	1	No Condorcet Winner — IRV (Hare): Dave wins by elimination → Dave	.yaml
omr_opposition_decides	method_comparisons/ordered_majority_rule/cases/	1	Ordered majority rule — the opposition decides the A-vs-B race (Toby Pereira's counterexample) → B	.yaml
bv2176_p8dp28_irv	method_comparisons/postit_rcv_example/cases/	1	The Post-it RCV example (20 voters) — RCV-IRV: Purple wins the video's whiteboard count → Purple	.yaml
bv2178_8kg698_irv	method_comparisons/postit_rcv_example/cases/	1	The Post-it switch, made real — RCV-IRV: Green eliminated, Blue 10, Purple 9 → Blue	.yaml
bv2170_pp2q4q_irv	method_comparisons/symmetric_centrist_bv2170/cases/	1	Symmetric centrist (47/47/3/3) — RCV-IRV: the centrist is squeezed, the poles deadlock → Avery	.yaml

PLURALITY (28)

Case (page)	Folder	Winners	Title / expected	src
bv1570_6hv7jf_undecided_plurality	01_STAR/04_Real_Elections/abstain_bugs/cases/	1	BV1570 — undecided plurality election still declares a winner → Approve	.yaml
bv15_4h89vj_plurality_abstain	01_STAR/04_Real_Elections/pet_real_bv_election/cases/	1	BV15 — Plurality + abstentions: the turnout undercount (Andre/Blake, 12 ballots) → Andre	.yaml
bv2130_bvhchj_party_plurality	03_STAR_PR/02_Examples/cases/	1	BV2130 — Presidential Board: party alignment (Plurality) → Democrat	.yaml
lunch_choose_one_dead_tie	06_Other/Plurality/cases/	1	Team lunch on a choose-one ballot — a dead tie (BV2257, q2rkfm) → Sushi	.yaml
BV_Library_plurality_single_winner	method_comparisons/BV_Library/cases/	1	BV parity — Plurality (choose-one): most first-marks wins → Dave	.yaml
bv2144_mxfmhm_plurality	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Felsenthal Ex.1 — Choose-One (Plurality): the absolute loser wins → Ana	.yaml
bv2160_r6qc8h_plurality	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Fishburn Ex.14 — Choose-One: A wins on first choices → A	.yaml
bv2161_q3h4fk_plurality	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Borda SCC Ex.15 — Choose-One: C wins on first choices → C	.yaml
bv2164_xbqq8t_plurality	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Coombs Ex.17 — Choose-One: Bree on first choices → Bree	.yaml
bv2165_9vxcj7_plurality	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Coombs Ex.19 full — Choose-One: Cass on first choices → Cass	.yaml
bv2166_b7b8dv_plurality	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Coombs Ex.19 no-show — Choose-One: still Cass, unmoved → Cass	.yaml
bv2167_f3dxq9_plurality	method_comparisons/felsenthal_paradoxes/cases/	1	Minimax Ex.29 — Choose-One: agrees with Minimax, elects the absolute loser D → D	.yaml
bv2277_tqfdbg_mayor_plurality	method_comparisons/kissel_single_elimination_rcv/cases/	1	BV2277 — The mayor's race (Choose-One): Ada wins on 33% → Ada	.yaml
bv2278_8cdkkc_five_way_plurality	method_comparisons/kissel_single_elimination_rcv/cases/	1	BV2278 — Kissel's five-way example (Choose-One): A wins on 30.6% → A	.yaml
bv2132_ykjjhy_pet_plurality	method_comparisons/pet_poll_four_methods/cases/	1	BV2132 — Pet poll (Plurality): the front-runner Dog wins → Dog	.yaml
bv2133_dyxrbr_pet2_plurality	method_comparisons/pet_poll_four_winners/cases/	1	BV2133 — Pet poll II (Plurality): the front-runner Dog wins → Dog	.yaml
bv2177_v8r66y_plurality	method_comparisons/postit_rcv_example/cases/	1	The Post-it election, seven ways — Choose-One: Purple on 7 first choices → Purple	.yaml
same_matrix_p1_plurality	method_comparisons/same_matrix_different_plurality/cases/	1	Same matrix, different plurality — electorate P1: Choose-One → Ada	.yaml
same_matrix_p2_plurality	method_comparisons/same_matrix_different_plurality/cases/	1	Same matrix, different plurality — electorate P2: Choose-One → Ben	.yaml
same_matrix_p3_plurality	method_comparisons/same_matrix_different_plurality/cases/	1	Same matrix, different plurality — electorate P3: Choose-One → Cal	.yaml
bv2170_pp2q4q_plurality	method_comparisons/symmetric_centrist_bv2170/cases/	1	Symmetric centrist (47/47/3/3) — Choose-One: the poles tie, the centrist gets 6 → Blake	.yaml
bv2210_fvg8y8_sntv_split	method_comparisons/food_truck_row/cases/	2	Food-Truck Row — SNTV: the 57% majority splits three ways and gets zero seats → Donut, Eclair	.yaml
pets_gov_bloc_plurality	method_comparisons/pets_governance/cases/	2	Pets Governance — Neighborhood Reps by Bloc Plurality / SNTV (2 seats): one of each → Dog, Bird	.yaml
sntv_village_council	method_comparisons/sntv_village_council/cases/	2	Village Council by SNTV — a concentrated minority wins a seat → Priya, Nora	.yaml
mmp_block_voting	method_comparisons/multi_member_plurality/cases/	3	Multi-member plurality — Block Voting (3 seats): majority sweeps → Ada, Ben, Cal	.yaml
mmp_limited_voting	method_comparisons/multi_member_plurality/cases/	3	Multi-member plurality — Limited Voting (3 seats): majority 2, minority 1 → Ada, Ben, Uma	.yaml
mmp_majority_ceiling	method_comparisons/multi_member_plurality/cases/	3	Block Voting (3 seats): the majority ceiling — a unanimous candidate holds only 33% → Alice, Bruno, Cleo	.yaml
mmp_sntv	method_comparisons/multi_member_plurality/cases/	3	Multi-member plurality — SNTV (3 seats): the minority tops the poll → Uma, Ada, Ben	.yaml

RANGE (4)

Case (page)	Folder	Winners	Title / expected	src
cav_library_board_blank_is_zero_c3_b12	06_Other/Combined_Approval/cases/	1	Library board on a blank-is-zero score ballot — the same twelve voters → Byron	.yaml
range_101_0to9_c3_b5	06_Other/Range/cases/	1	Range / Score Voting on its own scale — 0–9, the canonical ballot → Birch	.yaml
range_101_c3_b5	06_Other/Range/cases/	1	Range / Score Voting 101 — highest total score wins → Beth	.yaml
range_sullivan_score_c4_b10	06_Other/Range/cases/	1	Range / Score Voting — Sullivan's Example 5.2 (0–10 scale) → C	.yaml

RCV-IRV (3)

Case (page)	Folder	Winners	Title / expected	src
ballot_expressiveness_c9_irv_top5	method_comparisons/ballot_expressiveness/cases/	1	Nine candidates, 25 voters — ranking only five, counted by RCV-IRV → Ben	.yaml
bv2280_37yf8x_irv_full	method_comparisons/ballot_expressiveness/cases/	1	Nine candidates, 25 voters — ranking all nine, counted by RCV-IRV → Ben	.yaml
tilted_cycle_c3_b5_irv	method_comparisons/minimal_tilted_cycle/cases/	1	Minimal tilted cycle — 5 voters, margins 3–1–1 (RCV-IRV) → Cara	.yaml

RR (1)

Case (page)	Folder	Winners	Title / expected	src
03_real_record0_c6_b5	05_Ranked_Robin/02_Examples/condorcet_vs_ranked_robin/cases/	1	No Condorcet winner and Ranked Robin → B	.yaml