Advertisement

CHANCE

, Volume 23, Issue 3, pp 13–17 | Cite as

Fixed-cost vs. Fixed-risk post-election audits in Iowa

  • Jonathan Hobbs
  • Luke Fostvedt
  • Adam Pintar
  • David Rockoff
  • Eunice Kim
  • Randy Griffiths
Article
  • 33 Downloads

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Further reading

  1. American Statistical Association. 2010. Statement on risk-limiting post-election audits, www.amstat.org/outreach/pdfs/Risk-Limiting_Endorsement.pdf.
  2. Ash, Arlene, and John Lamperti. 2008. Florida 2006: Can statistics tell us who won congressional district-13? CHANCE 21(2):18–24.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. Ash, Arlene, and Philip B. Stark. 2009. Thinking outside the urn: Statisticians make their marks on U.S. ballots. Amstat News 384:37–40.Google Scholar
  4. Aslam, Javed A., Raluca A. Popa, and Ronald L. Rivest. 2008. On auditing elections when precincts have different sizes. In USENIX/ACCURATE electronic voting technology workshop.Google Scholar
  5. ElectionAudits.org. Principles and best practices for post-election audits. www.electionaudits.org/principles.
  6. Hargrove, Thomas. Too many votes go uncounted. www.ejfi.org/Voting/Voting-8.htm.
  7. McCarthy, John, Howard Stanislevic, Mark Lindeman, Arlene S. Ash, Vittorio Addona, and Mary Batcher. 2008. Percentage-based versus statistical-power based vote tabulation audits. The American Statistician 62:11–16.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© American Statistical Association 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jonathan Hobbs
  • Luke Fostvedt
  • Adam Pintar
  • David Rockoff
  • Eunice Kim
  • Randy Griffiths

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations