Same winner, very different counts — STAR adds, IRV eliminates¶
Generated from count_simplicity_star_vs_irv.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: Carmen
Scenario¶
40 voters, five candidates. Carmen is the broad consensus — most voters' strong second choice — and she wins under BOTH methods. The point of this file isn't WHO wins; it's how much work the COUNT takes.
STAR: add each candidate's scores (one column sum you can do on a napkin), take the top two, hold one automatic runoff. Two transparent steps, summable from precinct totals.
RCV-IRV (run this same file through 06_Other/RCV_IRV/RCV_IRV_tabulation_engine/): no first-round majority, so it eliminates the lowest, transfers those ballots to their next choice, rechecks, and repeats — round after round — until someone clears half. To follow it you must track every transfer, and you need every ballot in one place. Same winner, far more count.
Deep dive: 07_Concepts/is_rcv_simple.md (the "simple — which half?" point).
Ballots¶
Row 1 = candidate names; each later row is one voter's 0–5 scores (a N × prefix = N identical ballots).
Count:Andre,Blake,Carmen,Dana,Evan
10:4,3,5,2,1 # Carmen base (C > A > B > D > E)
9:5,3,4,2,1 # Andre first (A > C > B > D > E)
8:3,5,4,2,1 # Blake first (B > C > A > D > E)
7:3,2,4,5,1 # Dana first (D > C > A > B > E)
6:3,2,4,1,5 # Evan first (E > C > A > B > D)
What the engine says¶
The count, step by step — the rounds and how the winner is reached:
[Divergence from STAR]
STAR = Carmen
Approval = Andre (differs from STAR)
--- STAR Voting Method (single winner) ---
[STAR Voting]
Tabulating 40 ballots.
Count × Andre,Blake,Carmen,Dana,Evan
10 × 4, 3, 5, 2, 1
9 × 5, 3, 4, 2, 1
8 × 3, 5, 4, 2, 1
7 × 3, 2, 4, 5, 1
6 × 3, 2, 4, 1, 5
[STAR Voting: Scoring Round]
The two highest-scoring candidates advance to the next round.
Carmen -- 170 -- First place
Andre -- 148 -- Second place
Blake -- 123
Dana -- 95
Evan -- 64
Carmen and Andre advance.
[STAR Voting: Automatic Runoff Round]
The candidate preferred in the most head-to-head matchups wins.
Carmen -- 31 -- First place
Andre -- 9
Equal Support -- 0
Carmen wins.
Runoff math:
40 ballots cast
− 0 Equal Support (no preference between the two finalists)
──
40 voters with a preference (majority = 21)
Carmen 31 (78%) · Andre 9 (22%)
[STAR Voting: Winner — STAR Voting Method (single winner)]
Carmen
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
| * Andre | Blake | * Carmen | Dana | Evan |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Andre > | --- |32 - 0 - 8 | 9 - 0 - 31 |33 - 0 - 7 |34 - 0 - 6 |
Blake > | 8 - 0 - 32 | --- | 8 - 0 - 32 |33 - 0 - 7 |34 - 0 - 6 |
* Carmen > | 31 - 0 - 9 |32 - 0 - 8 | --- |33 - 0 - 7 |34 - 0 - 6 |
Dana > | 7 - 0 - 33 | 7 - 0 - 33 | 7 - 0 - 33 | --- |34 - 0 - 6 |
Evan > | 6 - 0 - 34 | 6 - 0 - 34 | 6 - 0 - 34 | 6 - 0 - 34 | --- |
[Condorcet Winner]
Condorcet Winner: Carmen — matches the STAR winner
[Condorcet Loser]
Condorcet Loser: Evan — 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
Andre 9 10 21 0 0 0 | 148 3.7
Blake 8 0 19 13 0 0 | 123 3.1
Carmen 10 30 0 0 0 0 | 170 4.3
Dana 7 0 0 27 6 0 | 95 2.4
Evan 6 0 0 0 34 0 | 64 1.6
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/_main/cases/count_simplicity_star_vs_irv.yaml
See also¶
- Methods disagree on this election — its entry in the divergence review ledger
- Summability (topic hub)
- Runoff reversal (worked set)
- Glossary · all cases by method