Alaska 2022 (sincere) — Begich is the Condorcet winner¶
Generated from alaska_sincere_c3_b200.yaml — do not edit by hand. Regenerate: python STARVote_LH_tabulation_engine/tools_adam/scripts/build_yaml_pages.py.
Method: RCV-IRV (Instant Runoff) · 1 seat · Expected winner: Peltola
Scenario¶
The August 2022 Alaska US House special, reduced to a faithful 200-voter teaching model (Peltola / Begich / Palin), as RANKED ballots. Sincere: Begich is the Condorcet winner — he beats Peltola 9 and Palin 39 head-to-head. Every Condorcet method (MinMax, Schulze, Ranked Pairs, and Condorcet-Hare) elects Begich; RCV-IRV alone eliminates him first (fewest first-choices) and elects Peltola. The burial twin shows rb-j's strategy: 20 Peltola voters rank Begich last, manufacturing a cycle. See the write-up: condorcet_burial_alaska/README.md
Ballots¶
Each row is one voter's ranking, most-preferred first (N: prefix = N identical ballots).
50:Peltola>Begich>Palin
36:Palin>Begich>Peltola
29:Begich>Palin>Peltola
25:Peltola
23:Palin
16:Begich>Peltola>Palin
12:Begich
5:Peltola>Palin>Begich
4:Palin>Peltola>Begich
What the engine says¶
Where the votes went. Band thickness is votes; a band leaving an eliminated candidate lands on whoever that ballot ranked next, or on inactive if it ranked nobody who was left.
The count, step by step — the rounds and how the winner is reached:
--- RCV / Instant-Runoff Voting (single winner) ---
Alaska 2022 (sincere) — Begich is the Condorcet winner
Tabulating 200 ballots (ranked ballots).
ROUND 1
Candidate Votes Status
----------- ------- --------
Peltola 80 Hopeful
Palin 63 Hopeful
Begich 57 Rejected
FINAL RESULT
Candidate Votes Status
----------- ------- --------
Peltola 96 Elected
Palin 92 Rejected
Begich 0 Rejected
Blank Votes 12 Rejected
Winner(s) — RCV / Instant-Runoff Voting (single winner)
Peltola
--- Transfers and inactive ballots (what the round tables leave out) ---
The tables above give each candidate's round total but not where a
transferred vote came FROM, nor how many ballots stopped counting.
Both are recomputed from the ballots, using the eliminations the
count above actually made.
ROUND 1 — 200 of 200 ballots still active; majority = 101
Begich eliminated with 57:
→ Palin 29
→ Peltola 16
→ (no continuing ranking) 12 ← these ballots go inactive
FINAL ROUND — 188 of 200 ballots still active (12 inactive); majority = 95
Peltola 96 (51.1% of the still-active) ← elected
Palin 92 (48.9% of the still-active)
Never exhausted, never transferred:
69 ballots held by Palin carried a lower ranking that was never read
(the count stopped here, so those preferences did nothing).
Inactive ballots at the final round: 12 of 200 (6.0%).
Peltola's 96 is a majority of the 188 still active but only 48.0% of all 200 cast —
the 'majority' here is of a shrunken denominator. See
06_Other/RCV_IRV/concepts/RCV_IRV_exhausted_ballots.md
Full audit — preference matrix, Condorcet, and score distribution¶
--- Smith Set (the generalized Condorcet winner) ---
The smallest group whose every member beats every candidate outside it —
the honest answer to "who is even in contention?".
Smith set (1 of 3): Begich
Outside (2): Peltola, Palin
One member ⇒ Begich is the Condorcet winner, beating every rival head-to-head.
RCV-IRV winner Peltola is OUTSIDE the Smith set. ✗
Every member of the set (Begich) beats Peltola head-to-head, yet
RCV-IRV elected Peltola anyway. RCV-IRV is not Smith-efficient (nor
Condorcet-efficient) — this is the shape a center squeeze leaves behind.
More: 07_Concepts/topics/smith_set.md
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/condorcet_burial_alaska/cases/alaska_sincere_c3_b200.yaml
See also¶
More cases in this set: alaska_buried_c3_b200