Audit Report for ESTES VALLEY RECREATION AND PARK DIST BALLOT ISSUE 4D
Proportion of the total number of votes for this contest that were cast within this county: 2.0%
- Overall margin of victory: 7.000%
- Margin of victory in this county: 4.762%
- Number of audit units in this county: 48
- Number of audit units to audit (NEGEXP, 75% confidence): 0.1
See additional statistical information below...
| Batch Seq | Threshhold | Random | Priority | Type | Batches | Ballots | Contest Ballots | NO | Over | Under | YES |
| Totals | 40 | 0 | 8 | 36 | |||||||
| 000005 | 0.089996 | AB | p088_mb_006 | None | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 000008 | 0.089996 | AB | p092_mb_010 | None | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ||
| 000009 | 0.089996 | AB | p094_mb_011 | None | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ||
| 000011 | 0.089996 | AB | p096_mb_013 | None | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 000012 | 0.089996 | AB | p097_mb_014 | None | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ||
| 000027 | 0.089996 | EV | p053_ev_027 | None | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ||
| 000018 | 0.089996 | AB | p076_mb_020 | None | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ||
| 000033 | 0.089996 | AB | p044_mb_035 | None | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 000035 | 0.089996 | AB | p046_mb_037 | None | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 000054 | 0.089996 | AB | p070_mb_057 | None | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 000029 | 0.246418 | EV | p039_ev_031 | None | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | ||
| 000064 | 0.089996 | EV | p112_ev_067 | None | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ||
| 000066 | 0.171892 | EV | p100_ev_069 | None | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 000055 | 0.246418 | AB | p033_mb_058 | None | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | ||
| 000075 | 0.089996 | AB | p107_ev_078 | None | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 000079 | 0.171892 | AB | p123_mb_082 | None | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 000080 | 0.089996 | AB | p124_mb_083 | None | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ||
| 000099 | 0.089996 | AB | p132_mb_102 | None | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 000105 | 0.171892 | AB | p169_mb_108 | None | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 000112 | 0.089996 | AB | p143_mb_115 | None | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 000123 | 0.089996 | AB | p147_mb_126 | None | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 000128 | 0.171892 | AB | p151_mb_129 | None | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | ||
| 000140 | 0.089996 | AB | p167_mb_139 | None | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 000150 | 0.089996 | AB | p172_mb_154 | None | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ||
| 000151 | 0.171892 | AB | p171_mb_155 | None | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 000155 | 0.089996 | AB | p177_mb_159 | None | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ||
| 000160 | 0.089996 | AB | p223_mb_164 | None | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ||
| 000174 | 0.171892 | AB | p229_mb_179 | None | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | ||
| 000069 | 0.089996 | EV | p103_ev_072 | None | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ||
| 000181 | 0.089996 | AB | p211_mb_186 | None | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ||
| 000208 | 0.089996 | AB | p247_mb_212 | None | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ||
| 000213 | 0.089996 | AB | p256_mb_218 | None | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ||
| 000221 | 0.089996 | AB | p270_mb_226 | None | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 000222 | 0.089996 | AB | p264_mb_227 | None | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ||
| 000223 | 0.089996 | AB | p242_mb_228 | None | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ||
| 000233 | 0.246418 | AB | p275_mb_238 | None | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ||
| 000113 | 0.816860 | ED | p138_ed_117 | None | 18 | 12 | 0 | 2 | 4 | ||
| 000239 | 0.089996 | AB | p299_mb_244 | None | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 000197 | 0.089996 | EV | p236_ev_202 | None | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ||
| 000265 | 0.089996 | AB | p281_mb_271 | None | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 000284 | 0.089996 | AB | p313_mb_290 | None | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 000285 | 0.089996 | AB | p314_mb_291 | None | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ||
| 000296 | 0.171892 | AB | p328_mb_302 | None | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | ||
| 000311 | 0.089996 | AB | p368_mb_317 | None | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ||
| 000317 | 0.089996 | AB | p365_mb_323 | None | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ||
| 000281 | 0.089996 | EV | p292_ev_282 | None | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ||
| 000262 | 0.171892 | ED | p288_ed_251 | None | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | ||
| 000318 | 0.432114 | AB | p364_mb_324 | None | 6 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
Audit statistics
The "Number of audit units to audit" is based on the NEGEXP method, which is very efficient and requires selecting larger audit units with higher probability than smaller ones. The numbers given here are based on a confidence level of 75%. I.e. they are designed so the audit will either 1) find a discrepancy and call for an escalation or full hand recount, or 2) reduce the risk of confirming an incorrect outcome to (100 - 75)%, even if the tally system has been manipulated. A maximum "within-precinct-miscount" of 20% is assumed. See On Auditing Elections When Precincts Have Different Sizes, by Javed A. Aslam, Raluca A. Popa and Ronald L. Rivest
Contest: ESTES VALLEY RECREATION AND PARK DIST BALLOT ISSUE 4D
Number of precincts: 48
Total number of votes cast: 84
Average number of votes/precinct: 1.75
Median number of votes/precinct: 1
Maximum number of votes/precinct: 18
Minimum number of votes/precinct: 1
Ratio of max/min: 18.0
margin = 7.0 percent, 5.88 votes
s = 0.2 (maximum within-precinct-miscount)
alpha = 0.25 (confidence is 1 - alpha: 0.75 )
Rule of Thumb says:
7.92168206354 precincts.
expected workload = 26.25 votes counted.
APR says:
b = 8.4 precincts needed to hold corruption
u = 7 precincts to audit
expected workload = 12.25 votes
confidence level to find one of b = 0.765395179292
bmin = 1
confidence level to find one of bmin = 0.145833333333
SAFE says:
bmin = 1
Number of precincts to audit = u = 36
Confidence level achieved = 0.75
expected workload = 63.0
Negexp says:
w = 4.24152342021
largest probability = 0.816859800016
smallest probability = 0.0899955040251
expected number of precincts audited = 6.51320438508
expected workload = 25.4140320771 votes counted
PPEBWR says:
t = 8
largest total probability = 0.854749647229
smallest total probability = 0.0913629308324
expected number of precincts audited = 6.65972681754
expected workload = 26.3440980642 votes counted.
max difference from negexp = 0.0378898472126