====================================================================== SOURCE FILE: bv2151_97hbpw_star.yaml TABULATED FILE: bv2151_97hbpw_star_tabulated.txt ====================================================================== election_title: "Felsenthal Ex.4 after two no-shows — STAR: unmoved, still Beth" scenario_description: |- Race 3 of 3 in the No-Show-paradox pair, part 2 of 2 (BV2151, bvid 97hbpw; BV-confirmed). Source: Dan S. Felsenthal (2010), Appendix A2, Example 4 — see bv2151_97hbpw_irv.yaml for the setup. The same 9 voters with ranks mapped 5/3/1. Scores: Andy 19, Beth 31, Carl 31 — Beth and Carl both clear Andy and advance (no advancement tie), and Beth wins the automatic runoff 5–4. STAR elects Beth with 11 voters (BV2150: 29/37/33, runoff 7–4) and with 9: same winner either way, so the Andy voters' participation never backfired under STAR in this pair. Live results: https://bettervoting.com/97hbpw/results bv_test_id: BV2151 bv_election_id: 97hbpw bv_results_url: https://bettervoting.com/97hbpw/results paradoxes: [no-show] voting_method: STAR num_winners: 1 ballots: |- Andy,Beth,Carl 5,3,1 5,3,1 1,5,3 1,5,3 1,5,3 3,1,5 1,3,5 1,3,5 1,3,5 expected_winners: - Beth # file: bv2151_97hbpw_star.yaml ====================================================================== TABULATION RESULTS ====================================================================== === Felsenthal Ex.4 after two no-shows — STAR: unmoved, still Beth === Race 3 of 3 in the No-Show-paradox pair, part 2 of 2 (BV2151, bvid 97hbpw; BV-confirmed). Source: Dan S. Felsenthal (2010), Appendix A2, Example 4 — see bv2151_97hbpw_irv.yaml for the setup. The same 9 voters with ranks mapped 5/3/1. Scores: Andy 19, Beth 31, Carl 31 — Beth and Carl both clear Andy and advance (no advancement tie), and Beth wins the automatic runoff 5–4. STAR elects Beth with 11 voters (BV2150: 29/37/33, runoff 7–4) and with 9: same winner either way, so the Andy voters' participation never backfired under STAR in this pair. Live results: https://bettervoting.com/97hbpw/results --- Runoff (Preference) Matrix --- Head-to-head / pairwise comparison Legend: For - Equal Support - Against * indicates Top 2 Finalist | Andy | * Beth | * Carl | ----------------------------------------------------- Andy > | --- |3 - 0 - 6 |2 - 0 - 7 | * Beth > | 6 - 0 - 3 | --- |5 - 0 - 4 | * Carl > | 7 - 0 - 2 |4 - 0 - 5 | --- | [Condorcet Winner] Condorcet Winner: Beth — matches the STAR winner [Condorcet Loser] Condorcet Loser: Andy — loses every head-to-head matchup [Divergence from STAR] STAR = Beth Choose-One (Plurality) = Carl (differs from STAR) --- STAR Voting Method (single winner) --- [STAR Voting] Tabulating 9 ballots. Count × Andy,Beth,Carl 3 × 1, 5, 3 3 × 1, 3, 5 2 × 5, 3, 1 1 × 3, 1, 5 [Score Distribution] (how many ballots gave each star rating) Score Candidate 5 4 3 2 1 0 | Total Avg Andy 2 0 1 0 6 0 | 19 2.1 Beth 3 0 5 0 1 0 | 31 3.4 Carl 4 0 3 0 2 0 | 31 3.4 [STAR Voting: Scoring Round] The two highest-scoring candidates advance to the next round. Beth -- 31 -- First place Carl -- 31 -- Second place Andy -- 19 Beth and Carl advance. [STAR Voting: Automatic Runoff Round] The candidate preferred in the most head-to-head matchups wins. Beth -- 5 -- First place Carl -- 4 Equal Support -- 0 Beth wins. Runoff math: 9 ballots cast − 0 Equal Support (no preference between the two finalists) ─ 9 voters with a preference (majority = 5) Beth 5 (56%) · Carl 4 (44%) [STAR Voting: Winner — STAR Voting Method (single winner)] Beth