Skip to content

Exercise 2 — The tenth ballot: Bella withdraws

Bucket — STAR_OUTLIER_RR_WITH_IRV: STAR is the outlier

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

What happens

RCV-IRV and Ranked Robin both elect Eli, the Condorcet (pairwise) winner. STAR instead elects Chris, because its score-then-automatic-runoff can reward a candidate with broad, intense scored support even when a different candidate wins every head-to-head. Here STAR is the outlier — an honest reminder that STAR does not always elect the Condorcet candidate.

Winners by method

Method Winner
STAR Chris
RCV-IRV Eli
Ranked Robin (RCV-RR) Eli
Approval Alex
Range / Score Alex
Condorcet Eli

Flags: none

Source election: 01_STAR/05_Practice/cases/ex02_bella_exits.yaml · STAR tabulated mirror: ex02_bella_exits_tabulated.txt

4 candidates, 9 ballots.

The ballots

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

Count Alex Chris Dana Eli
4 3 4 5 0
3 3 0 0 4
2 3 4 0 5

STAR result (official)

Scoring round (sum of scores): Alex 27, Chris 24, Eli 22, Dana 20

Finalists (top two): Alex and Chris

Automatic runoff: Alex 3 vs Chris 6

STAR winner: Chris

Full LH STAR engine report:

--- Runoff (Preference) Matrix ---
Head-to-head / pairwise comparison
Legend: For - Equal Support - Against
        * indicates Top 2 Finalist
               |   * Alex   | * Chris   |
-----------------------------------------
      * Alex > |    ---     |3 - 0 - 6  |
     * Chris > | 6 - 0 - 3  |   ---     |

[Divergence from STAR]
  STAR                   = Chris
  Choose-One (Plurality) = Eli   (differs from STAR)
  RCV-IRV                = Eli   (differs from STAR)
  Approval               = Alex   (differs from STAR)
  RCV-RR (Condorcet)     = Eli   (differs from STAR)
  Note: no ballots had tied scores, so RCV-IRV vs STAR here is a genuine
        method difference, not a tie-breaking artifact.
  Note: Ranked Robin (RCV-RR) sides with RCV-IRV, so STAR is the outlier
        here — STAR need not elect the Condorcet candidate.

[Runoff Reversal]
 - Score Round Winner(s) = (Alex)
 - Runoff Round Winner   = (Chris)
  Candidate Alex earned the highest total score, but
  Candidate Chris 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 9 ballots.
Count × Alex,Chris,Dana,Eli
    4 ×    3,    4,   5,  0
    3 ×    3,    0,   0,  4
    2 ×    3,    4,   0,  5

[Score Distribution] (how many ballots gave each star rating)
                Score
Candidate  5  4  3  2  1  0  | Total   Avg
Alex       0  0  9  0  0  0  |    27   3.0
Chris      0  6  0  0  0  3  |    24   2.7
Dana       4  0  0  0  0  5  |    20   2.2
Eli        2  3  0  0  0  4  |    22   2.4

Scoring Round
 The two highest-scoring candidates advance to the next round.
   Alex          -- 27 -- First place
   Chris         -- 24 -- Second place
   Eli           -- 22
   Dana          -- 20
 Alex and Chris advance.

Automatic Runoff Round
 The candidate preferred in the most head-to-head matchups wins.
   Chris         -- 6 -- First place
   Alex          -- 3
   Equal Support -- 0
 Chris wins.
   Voters with a preference: 9 of 9 (no Equal Support).
   Chris 6 (67%) vs Alex 3 (33%); majority = 5.

Winner — STAR Voting Method (single winner)
 Chris

RCV-IRV — round by round

--- RCV / Instant-Runoff Voting (single winner) ---
 Tabulating 9 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: Alex, Chris, Dana, Eli
     4 ×   Dana > Chris > Alex      (3, 4, 5, 0)
     3 ×   Eli > Alex      (3, 0, 0, 4)
     2 ×   Eli > Chris > Alex      (3, 4, 0, 5)

FINAL RESULT
Candidate      Votes  Status
-----------  -------  --------
Eli                5  Elected
Dana               4  Rejected
Chris              0  Rejected
Alex               0  Rejected


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

--- 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 4): Eli
   Outside (3):        Alex, Chris, Dana
   One member ⇒ Eli is the Condorcet winner, beating every rival head-to-head.
   RCV-IRV winner Eli 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 9 ballots (score ballots).

Ballots:
   the ranking Ranked Robin reads ("=" = tied); source scores follow in () per column: Alex, Chris, Dana, Eli
     4 × Dana > Chris > Alex > Eli      (3, 4, 5, 0)
     3 × Eli > Alex > Chris=Dana      (3, 0, 0, 4)
     2 × Eli > Chris > Alex > Dana      (3, 4, 0, 5)

Round-Robin — every pair, head-to-head (For – Against):
   Chris  beats Alex    6 – 3
   Alex   beats Dana    5 – 4
   Eli    beats Alex    5 – 4
   Dana   beats Chris   4 – 2
   Eli    beats Chris   5 – 4
   Eli    beats Dana    5 – 4

--- Pairwise (Round-Robin) Matrix ---
Head-to-head / pairwise comparison — the Ranked Robin tally
Legend: For - Equal Support - Against   (row vs column)
          |   Alex    |  Chris   |  Dana    |   Eli    |
--------------------------------------------------------
   Alex > |    ---    |3 - 0 - 6 |5 - 0 - 4 |4 - 0 - 5 |
  Chris > | 6 - 0 - 3 |   ---    |2 - 3 - 4 |4 - 0 - 5 |
   Dana > | 4 - 0 - 5 |4 - 3 - 2 |   ---    |4 - 0 - 5 |
    Eli > | 5 - 0 - 4 |5 - 0 - 4 |5 - 0 - 4 |   ---    |

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  Eli        3–0–0         3      +3  Chris, Dana, Alex
    2  Chris      1–2–0         1      +0  Alex
    3  Dana       1–2–0         1      +0  Chris
    4  Alex       1–2–0         1      -3  Dana

Winner — Ranked Robin (RCV-RR): Eli
   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 4): Eli
   Outside (3):        Alex, Chris, Dana
   One member ⇒ Eli is the Condorcet winner, beating every rival head-to-head.
   Ranked Robin (RCV-RR) winner Eli 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