Skip to content

Alaska 2022 US House general (reduced model) — IRV got it right: all four counts elect the Condorcet winner, Peltola

▶ Live on BetterVoting: vote · results ↗ (election m3hb6y · test BV2214) — an independent tabulator to check the winners below against.

Bucket — APPROVAL_OR_MINOR: Only Approval differs

Generated by STARVote_LH_tabulation_engine/tools_adam/scripts/build_divergence_index.py — rebuilt from the election file; do not hand-edit.

What happens

STAR, RCV-IRV and Ranked Robin all agree on Peltola. Only Approval differs, electing Begich: Approval counts every score of 3–5 as one equal 'approve' and ignores intensity, rewarding Begich's breadth of acceptability over Peltola's stronger but more concentrated support. A threshold story about Approval, not a STAR-vs-IRV teaching case.

Winners by method

Method Winner
STAR Peltola
RCV-IRV Peltola
Ranked Robin (RCV-RR) Peltola
Approval Begich
Range / Score Begich
Condorcet Peltola

Flags: none

Source election: method_comparisons/alaska_2022_general/cases/bv2214_m3hb6y_alaska_2022_general.yaml · STAR tabulated mirror: bv2214_m3hb6y_alaska_2022_general_tabulated.txt

3 candidates, 200 ballots.

The ballots

Each row is a group of identical score ballots (0 = no support, 5 = max).

Count Peltola Begich Palin
50 5 0 0
42 5 4 0
6 5 0 4
11 0 5 0
33 0 5 4
6 4 5 0
17 0 0 5
32 0 4 5
3 4 0 5

STAR result (official)

Scoring round (sum of scores): Begich 546, Peltola 526, Palin 416

Finalists (top two): Begich and Peltola

Automatic runoff: Begich 82 vs Peltola 101 (17 equal/no-preference)

STAR winner: Peltola

Full LH STAR engine report:

--- Runoff (Preference) Matrix ---
Head-to-head / pairwise comparison
Legend: For - Equal Support - Against
        * indicates Top 2 Finalist
                    |    * Peltola    |   * Begich     |
--------------------------------------------------------
        * Peltola > |       ---       |101 -  17 -  82 |
         * Begich > |  82 -  17 - 101 |      ---       |

[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) ---
 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

[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

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.

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.
   Voters with a preference: 183 of 200 (17 Equal Support).
   Peltola 101 (55%) vs Begich 82 (45%); majority = 92.

Winner — STAR Voting Method (single winner)
 Peltola

RCV-IRV — round by round

--- RCV / Instant-Runoff Voting (single winner) ---
 Tabulating 200 ballots (converted from score ballots; 0 = unranked, equal scores broken by candidate priority).

Ballots:
   the ranking RCV-IRV reads (0 = unranked, equal scores broken by priority);
   the source score ballot follows in () per column: Peltola, Begich, Palin
    50 ×   Peltola      (5, 0, 0)
    42 ×   Peltola > Begich      (5, 4, 0)
     6 ×   Peltola > Palin      (5, 0, 4)
    11 ×   Begich      (0, 5, 0)
    33 ×   Begich > Palin      (0, 5, 4)
     6 ×   Begich > Peltola      (4, 5, 0)
    17 ×   Palin      (0, 0, 5)
    32 ×   Palin > Begich      (0, 4, 5)
     3 ×   Palin > Peltola      (4, 0, 5)

ROUND 1
Candidate      Votes  Status
-----------  -------  --------
Peltola           98  Hopeful
Palin             52  Hopeful
Begich            50  Rejected

FINAL RESULT
Candidate      Votes  Status
-----------  -------  --------
Peltola          104  Elected
Palin             85  Rejected
Begich             0  Rejected
Blank Votes       11  Rejected


Winner(s) — RCV / Instant-Runoff Voting (single winner)
  Peltola

--- 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): Peltola
   Outside (2):        Begich, Palin
   One member ⇒ Peltola is the Condorcet winner, beating every rival head-to-head.
   RCV-IRV winner Peltola is INSIDE the Smith set. ✓
      Not guaranteed — RCV-IRV is not Smith-efficient — but it holds here.
   More: 07_Concepts/topics/smith_set.md

NOTE: a generated cross-method view of the STAR ballots, for comparison only — not the official STAR result.

Ranked Robin (RCV-RR) — every pair, head-to-head

--- Ranked Robin (RCV-RR / Copeland) Method (single winner) ---
 Tabulating 200 ballots (score ballots).

Ballots:
   the ranking Ranked Robin reads ("=" = tied); source scores follow in () per column: Peltola, Begich, Palin
    50 × Peltola > Begich=Palin      (5, 0, 0)
    42 × Peltola > Begich > Palin      (5, 4, 0)
     6 × Peltola > Palin > Begich      (5, 0, 4)
    11 × Begich > Peltola=Palin      (0, 5, 0)
    33 × Begich > Palin > Peltola      (0, 5, 4)
     6 × Begich > Peltola > Palin      (4, 5, 0)
    17 × Palin > Peltola=Begich      (0, 0, 5)
    32 × Palin > Begich > Peltola      (0, 4, 5)
     3 × Palin > Peltola > Begich      (4, 0, 5)

Round-Robin — every pair, head-to-head (For – Against):
   Peltola  beats Begich    101 –  82
   Peltola  beats Palin     104 –  85
   Begich   beats Palin      92 –  58

--- Pairwise (Round-Robin) Matrix ---
Head-to-head / pairwise comparison — the Ranked Robin tally
Legend: For - Equal Support - Against   (row vs column)
            |     Peltola     |    Begich      |     Palin      |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
  Peltola > |       ---       |101 -  17 -  82 |104 -  11 -  85 |
   Begich > |  82 -  17 - 101 |      ---       | 92 -  50 -  58 |
    Palin > |  85 -  11 - 104 | 58 -  50 -  92 |      ---       |

Win–loss record — Copeland score = wins + ½·ties (highest score wins; ties broken by total margin, then lot order):
    #  Candidate  W–L–T  Copeland  Margin  Beats
    1  Peltola    2–0–0         2     +38  Begich, Palin
    2  Begich     1–1–0         1     +15  Palin
    3  Palin      0–2–0         0     -53  —

Winner — Ranked Robin (RCV-RR): Peltola
   beats every opponent head-to-head — the Condorcet winner.

--- 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): Peltola
   Outside (2):        Begich, Palin
   One member ⇒ Peltola is the Condorcet winner, beating every rival head-to-head.
   Ranked Robin (RCV-RR) winner Peltola is INSIDE the Smith set. ✓
      Guaranteed: Ranked Robin (Copeland) is Smith-efficient — every member of
      the set outscores every outsider, so the top of the win–loss table is
      always inside the set, however the tie among them is then broken.
   More: 07_Concepts/topics/smith_set.md