The Annals of Applied Statistics

A sharper discrepancy measure for post-election audits

Philip B. Stark

Source: Ann. Appl. Stat. Volume 2, Number 3 (2008), 982-985.

Abstract

Post-election audits use the discrepancy between machine counts and a hand tally of votes in a random sample of precincts to infer whether error affected the electoral outcome. The maximum relative overstatement of pairwise margins (MRO) quantifies that discrepancy. The electoral outcome a full hand tally shows must agree with the apparent outcome if the MRO is less than 1. This condition is sharper than previous ones when there are more than two candidates or when voters may vote for more than one candidate. For the 2006 U.S. Senate race in Minnesota, a test using MRO gives a P-value of 4.05% for the hypothesis that a full hand tally would find a different winner, less than half the value Stark [Ann. Appl. Statist. 2 (2008) 550–581] finds.

Keywords: Elections; auditing; error bounds in auditing

Full-text: Access denied (no subscription detected)

In 2007, access to the Annals of Applied Statistics was open. Beginning in 2008, you must hold a subscription or be a member of the IMS to view the full journal. For more information on subscribing, please visit: http://imstat.org/orders.
If you are already an IMS member, you may need to update your Euclid profile following the instructions here: http://imstat.org/publications/eaccess.htm.
Links and Identifiers

Permanent link to this document: http://projecteuclid.org/euclid.aoas/1223908048
Digital Object Identifier: doi:10.1214/08-AOAS171
Zentralblatt MATH identifier: 05377255

References

Stark, P. B. (2008). Conservative statistical post-election audits. Ann. Appl. Statist. 2 550–581.

2009 © Institute of Mathematical Statistics