BV parity — STAR: highest-scoring Condorcet winner¶

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

Method: STAR (single winner) · 1 seat · Expected winner: Allison

Scenario¶

Ported from BetterVoting's tabulator unit tests (Star.test.ts :: "Condorcet Winner"). Allison is both the highest-scoring candidate and the Condorcet winner; Carmen is the runner-up in BetterVoting's result.

Ballots¶

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

Allison,Bill,Carmen,Doug
5,2,1,4
5,2,1,0
5,2,1,0
5,2,1,0
5,3,4,0
5,1,4,0
5,1,4,0
4,0,5,1
3,4,5,0
3,5,5,5

What the engine says¶

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

--- STAR Voting Method (single winner) ---

[STAR Voting]
 Tabulating 10 ballots.
Count × Allison,Bill,Carmen,Doug
    3 ×       5,   2,     1,   0
    2 ×       5,   1,     4,   0
    1 ×       5,   2,     1,   4
    1 ×       5,   3,     4,   0
    1 ×       4,   0,     5,   1
    1 ×       3,   4,     5,   0
    1 ×       3,   5,     5,   5

[STAR Voting: Scoring Round]
 The two highest-scoring candidates advance to the next round.
   Allison       -- 45 -- First place
   Carmen        -- 31 -- Second place
   Bill          -- 22
   Doug          -- 10
 Allison and Carmen advance.

[STAR Voting: Automatic Runoff Round]
 The candidate preferred in the most head-to-head matchups wins.
   Allison       -- 7 -- First place
   Carmen        -- 3
   Equal Support -- 0
 Allison wins.
   Runoff math:
     10  ballots cast
   −  0  Equal Support (no preference between the two finalists)
     ──
     10  voters with a preference  (majority = 6)
           Allison 7 (70%)  ·  Carmen 3 (30%)

[STAR Voting: Winner — STAR Voting Method (single winner)]
 Allison

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

--- Runoff (Preference) Matrix ---
Head-to-head / pairwise comparison
Legend: For - Equal Support - Against
        * indicates Top 2 Finalist
                |  * Allison  |    Bill    | * Carmen   |    Doug    |
----------------------------------------------------------------------
    * Allison > |     ---     | 8 - 0 - 2  | 7 - 0 - 3  | 9 - 0 - 1  |
         Bill > |  2 - 0 - 8  |    ---     | 4 - 1 - 5  | 7 - 1 - 2  |
     * Carmen > |  3 - 0 - 7  | 5 - 1 - 4  |    ---     | 8 - 1 - 1  |
         Doug > |  1 - 0 - 9  | 2 - 1 - 7  | 1 - 1 - 8  |    ---     |

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

[Condorcet Loser]
  Condorcet Loser: Doug — loses every head-to-head matchup

[Score Distribution] (how many ballots gave each star rating)
                Score
Candidate  5  4  3  2  1  0  | Total   Avg
Allison    7  1  2  0  0  0  |    45   4.5
Bill       1  1  1  4  2  1  |    22   2.2
Carmen     3  3  0  0  4  0  |    31   3.1
Doug       1  1  0  0  1  7  |    10   1.0

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

Run it yourself:

python STARVote_LH_tabulation_engine/starvote_larry_hastings.py method_comparisons/BV_Library/cases/BV_Library_star_condorcet_winner.yaml

BV parity — STAR: highest-scoring Condorcet winner¶

Scenario¶

Ballots¶

What the engine says¶

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

See also¶