Alaska 2022 US House general (reduced model) — IRV got it right: all four counts elect the Condorcet winner, Peltola¶
Generated from bv2214_m3hb6y_alaska_2022_general.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: Peltola
▶ Live on BetterVoting: vote · results ↗ (election m3hb6y · test BV2214).
Scenario¶
A reduced 200-voter TEACHING MODEL of the November 2022 Alaska US House GENERAL election — the happy-ending counterpart to the August special. Same three main candidates (the fourth, Bye, finished last and is dropped, as Equal Vote's realrcv visualizer does); this is NOT the real vote data but a reconstruction of realrcv's own 200-dot model, matched to its stated results. First choices: Peltola 98, Palin 52, Begich 50. RCV-IRV eliminates Begich, 11 ballots exhaust, and Peltola beats Palin 104-85. But THIS time the electorate had shifted and Peltola is the Condorcet winner (beats Begich 101-82 and Palin 104-85) — so ALL FOUR counts elect her: Plurality, RCV-IRV, Ranked Robin, and STAR. IRV got it right. The mirror image of the special (BV2213), where the same methods split 2-2 and IRV cut the Condorcet winner: the center-squeeze failure is real but CONDITIONAL. (Bonus: Begich leads STAR's score round 546 as everyone's broad 2nd choice, but Peltola wins the runoff 101-82 — STAR self-correcting toward the majority-preferred candidate.) Scores are a rank->score overlay (favorite 5, 2nd 4, unranked 0). Source: Equal Vote's Real RCV, realrcv.equal.vote/alaska22general. Live results (BV2214, all four races): https://bettervoting.com/m3hb6y/results Lesson: README.md
Ballots¶
Row 1 = candidate names; each later row is one voter's 0–5 scores (a N × prefix = N identical ballots).
Peltola, Begich, Palin
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,0,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,4,0
5,0,4
5,0,4
5,0,4
5,0,4
5,0,4
5,0,4
0,5,0
0,5,0
0,5,0
0,5,0
0,5,0
0,5,0
0,5,0
0,5,0
0,5,0
0,5,0
0,5,0
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
0,5,4
4,5,0
4,5,0
4,5,0
4,5,0
4,5,0
4,5,0
0,0,5
0,0,5
0,0,5
0,0,5
0,0,5
0,0,5
0,0,5
0,0,5
0,0,5
0,0,5
0,0,5
0,0,5
0,0,5
0,0,5
0,0,5
0,0,5
0,0,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
0,4,5
4,0,5
4,0,5
4,0,5
What the engine says¶
The count, step by step — the rounds and how the winner is reached:
[Divergence from STAR]
STAR = Peltola
Approval = Begich (differs from STAR)
[Runoff Reversal]
- Score Round Winner(s) = (Begich)
- Runoff Round Winner = (Peltola)
Candidate Begich earned the highest total score, but
Candidate Peltola won the automatic runoff — not a malfunction,
STAR working as designed: the runoff elects the finalist preferred
by the majority (of voters with a preference).
--- STAR Voting Method (single winner) ---
[STAR Voting]
Tabulating 200 ballots.
Count × Peltola,Begich,Palin
50 × 5, 0, 0
42 × 5, 4, 0
33 × 0, 5, 4
32 × 0, 4, 5
17 × 0, 0, 5
11 × 0, 5, 0
6 × 5, 0, 4
6 × 4, 5, 0
3 × 4, 0, 5
[STAR Voting: Scoring Round]
The two highest-scoring candidates advance to the next round.
Begich -- 546 -- First place
Peltola -- 526 -- Second place
Palin -- 416
Begich and Peltola advance.
[STAR Voting: Automatic Runoff Round]
The candidate preferred in the most head-to-head matchups wins.
Peltola -- 101 -- First place
Begich -- 82
Equal Support -- 17
Peltola wins.
Runoff math:
200 ballots cast
− 17 Equal Support (no preference between the two finalists)
───
183 voters with a preference (majority = 92)
Peltola 101 (55%) · Begich 82 (45%)
[STAR Voting: Winner — STAR Voting Method (single winner)]
Peltola
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
| * Peltola | * Begich | Palin |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Peltola > | --- |101 - 17 - 82 |104 - 11 - 85 |
* Begich > | 82 - 17 - 101 | --- | 92 - 50 - 58 |
Palin > | 85 - 11 - 104 | 58 - 50 - 92 | --- |
[Condorcet Winner]
Condorcet Winner: Peltola — matches the STAR winner
[Condorcet Loser]
Condorcet Loser: Palin — 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
Peltola 98 9 0 0 0 93 | 526 2.6
Begich 50 74 0 0 0 76 | 546 2.7
Palin 52 39 0 0 0 109 | 416 2.1
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/alaska_2022_general/cases/bv2214_m3hb6y_alaska_2022_general.yaml
See also¶
- Methods disagree on this election — its entry in the divergence review ledger
- Center squeeze (topic hub)
- Condorcet efficiency (topic hub)
- Vote splitting (worked set)
- Runoff reversal (worked set)
- Exhausted ballots (untangled)
- Glossary · all cases by method