A made-up three-candidate plurality contest: evidence account
In plain words
The count under ranked pairs elected Ames because after locking the strongest victories that do not close a cycle, no locked victory runs against Ames.
No audit ran.
No container custody was supplied.
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.
The contest
Title: A made-up three-candidate plurality contest
Candidates: Ames, Baird, Cortez.
Records in this count: 1,000.
Ballot file: plurality-3
Source: Invented for this package. No real election.
Ames has 450 first choices (45%), Baird has 350 (35%), Cortez has 200 (20%).
Nobody has a majority, but Ames has a plurality. Used to test BRAVO ballot polling.
Where the records sat:
One stack of 1,000 records. There is no ballot manifest of sealed containers.
No container custody was supplied.
What was configured
Configuration version: plurality-3-plurality-v1-under-ranked-pairs.
Configuration fingerprint (SHA-256): 9e1efa1ab1809d78f38448dd6288a4f70f2823ebaa450183e6d42a8ab51b5508.
Counting rule: ranked pairs.
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: plurality-3. 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: plurality-3-plurality-v1-under-ranked-pairs
Fingerprint (SHA-256): 9e1efa1ab1809d78f38448dd6288a4f70f2823ebaa450183e6d42a8ab51b5508
Election: A made-up three-candidate plurality contest, counted under ranked pairs (Tideman)
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:
A made-up three-candidate plurality contest (plurality-3): Ames; Baird; Cortez.
Counting rule: ranked pairs (Tideman).
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 ranked pairs, including every intermediate step.
What was counted
Ballots in this count: 1,000.
Ballots from: Invented for this package. No real election.
Ames has 450 first choices (45%), Baird has 350 (35%), Cortez has 200 (20%).
Nobody has a majority, but Ames has a plurality. Used to test BRAVO ballot polling.
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.
| Ranking | Ballots |
|---|---|
| Ames > Baird > Cortez | 450 |
| Baird > Ames > Cortez | 350 |
| Cortez > Ames > Baird | 200 |
Head to head
Every candidate is set against every other. A ballot counts in a matchup when it ranks one of the two above the other. A candidate a ballot never ranks is ranked last on that ballot, tied with every other candidate it never ranks, so such a ballot has no preference between them.
| Matchup | Votes | Against | Votes | No preference | Wins |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ames | 650 | Baird | 350 | 0 | Ames |
| Ames | 800 | Cortez | 200 | 0 | Ames |
| Baird | 800 | Cortez | 200 | 0 | Baird |
Ranked pairs
Sort pairwise victories from strongest margin to weakest. Lock each victory in order unless it would close a cycle with victories already locked. Equal-strength victories are considered together, and any of them that would sit on a cycle is skipped.
Scores are finishing ranks from the locked graph (higher is better).
| Candidate | Ranked-pairs score |
|---|---|
| Ames | 3 |
| Baird | 2 |
| Cortez | 1 |
Outcome
Ranked-pairs scores: Ames 3; Baird 2; Cortez 1.
Ames is elected under ranked pairs (Tideman): after locking the strongest victories that do not close a cycle, Ames finishes first.
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.
| Contest | Records | With no mark | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| plurality-3 | 1,000 | 0 | 0.00% |
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.