Riverbend mayor, one machine's readings altered: evidence account

The contest

Title: Riverbend mayor, one machine's readings altered

Candidates: Ames, Bell, Cruz.

Records in this count: 60.

Ballot file: comparison-altered-machine

Source: Synthetic committed CVRs. No real election was counted.

Sixty ballots, twenty to a precinct, one reading machine to a precinct. The papers hold Ames 22, Bell 28, Cruz 10. reader-3 recorded ten of its Bell papers as Ames, so the machine readings report Ames 32, Bell 18, Cruz 10. Each row is one physical ballot; `paper` is present only where the paper differs from the machine reading. This is a fixture, not a sealed container.

Where the records sat:

One stack of 60 records. There is no ballot manifest of sealed containers.

No container custody was supplied.

What was configured

Configuration version: comparison-altered-machine-plurality-v1-under-maximal-lotteries.

Configuration fingerprint (SHA-256): 1024c9794c2da58cf8c6e0dc9639aecd8f08ee5b55adc66559c08e6a4f1402ea.

Counting rule: maximal lotteries.

Ballot rules used: Two or more marks at one rank end the ballot there; 2 ranks in a row left blank end the ballot; a candidate marked again lower down counts as a rank left blank.

Ballot file: comparison-altered-machine. A third party with this file can rerun the count.

Audit: none. No seed was used.

Configured audit risk limit: 10%.

Plain-language configuration (check against statute intent):

Configuration version: comparison-altered-machine-plurality-v1-under-maximal-lotteries

Fingerprint (SHA-256): 1024c9794c2da58cf8c6e0dc9639aecd8f08ee5b55adc66559c08e6a4f1402ea

Election: Riverbend mayor, one machine's readings altered, counted under maximal lotteries

A demonstration configuration over committed fixture records, counting the same ballots under another rule. No audit ran under it, and no real election was counted under it.

Contests and candidates:

Riverbend mayor, one machine's readings altered (mayor): Ames; Bell; Cruz.

Counting rule: maximal lotteries.

Tiebreak: not used under this counting rule.

Ballot rules (how marks become a ranking):

Two or more marks at one rank: the ballot counts up to that rank and no further.

A candidate marked again lower down: that rank counts as a rank left blank.

2 ranks in a row left blank: the ballot counts up to there and no further.

A mark for anyone not on the ballot: a mark, so the rank is not blank, but never a vote.

Audit risk limit: 10%. A risk-limiting audit that runs under this configuration stops when the sample confirms the outcome at that limit, or sends the contest to a full hand count.

How a ballot is counted and how an audit stops are fixed by this version. Changing any of the lines above requires a new version id.

The count

What follows is the counting account under maximal lotteries, including every intermediate step.

What was counted

Ballots in this count: 60.

Ballots from: Synthetic committed CVRs. No real election was counted.

Sixty ballots, twenty to a precinct, one reading machine to a precinct. The papers hold Ames 22, Bell 28, Cruz 10. reader-3 recorded ten of its Bell papers as Ames, so the machine readings report Ames 32, Bell 18, Cruz 10. Each row is one physical ballot; `paper` is present only where the paper differs from the machine reading. This is a fixture, not a sealed container.

How the marks on a ballot were read:

Two or more marks at one rank: the ballot counts up to that rank and no further.

A candidate marked again lower down: that rank counts as a rank left blank.

2 ranks in a row left blank: the ballot counts up to there and no further.

A mark for anyone not on the ballot: a mark, so the rank is not blank, but never a vote.

The rankings the ballots form, and how many ballots form each. A candidate a ranking does not name is ranked last on those ballots.

Lottery

Maximal lotteries finds a mixed strategy on the Smith set of pairwise margins (a Nash equilibrium of that zero-sum game). Candidates outside the Smith set get probability 0.

Public seed for this draw: plurality-altered-machine-count.

Given that seed and these ballots, the draw is deterministic: the same seed reprints the same outcome. The method itself is still stochastic: a different seed can elect a different candidate.

Risk-limiting audits and the Ranked Robin evidence story do not apply the same way to a lottery or random draw. This account does not claim an RLA confirmation of the drawn winner.

Ames is drawn from the maximal lotteries distribution under public seed plurality-altered-machine-count.

Records with no mark, by contest and by machine

At the close of polls, the share of records with no mark in each contest, by contest and by machine. Leaving a contest blank is a voter's right; an outlier below is a question about the ballot or the machine, not a verdict.

The audit

No audit ran.

What was found

No audit ran, so there are no sample findings.

Custody: none supplied. No container custody chain was recorded or verified.

Why it stopped

Decision: no audit.

No audit ran.

Outcome status: preliminary. Software tallies stay preliminary until an audit on the record confirms them or a full hand count of the record replaces them.