Das Benfordsche Gesetz eignet sich nicht für die Analyse von Wahlfälschungen. (mL)

DT, Dienstag, 14.01.2025, 15:11 (vor 33 Tagen) @ Brutus1643 Views

Joseph Deckert, Mikhail Myagkov und Peter C. Ordeshook: The Irrelevance of Benford’s Law for Detecting Fraud in Elections. (PDF) Caltech/MIT Voting Technology Project Working Paper No. 9, 2010 (bei archive.org (Memento vom 17. Mai 2014 im Internet Archive)).

Charles R. Tolle, Joanne L. Budzien, Randall A. LaViolette: Do dynamical systems follow Benford’s Law? In: Chaos, 10, 2, 2000, S. 331–336, doi:10.1063/1.166498.

Joseph Deckert, Mikhail Myagkov, and Peter C. Ordeshook: Benford’s Law and the Detection of Election Fraud. University of Oregon 97403 and California Institute of Technology 91124, 2011, abgerufen am 7. November 2020 (englisch):

„With respect to Benford’s Law, we know some of the conditions that, if satisfied, yield numbers in accordance with it, but just as there is no basis for supposing that the Ijiri-Simon model of firm size or an empirical relationship that holds for insects and city sizes applies to parties, candidates or anything else political, there is no reason to suppose a priori that the conditions sufficient to occasion digits matching 2BL necessarily hold any meaning for elections.“

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0261379411000370
Searching for electoral irregularities in an established democracy: Applying Benford’s Law tests to Bundestag elections in Unified Germany
Electoral Studies
Volume 30, Issue 3, September 2011, Pages 534-545

Abstract
This article investigates electoral irregularities in the 1990 to 2005 Bundestag elections of unified Germany. Drawing on the Second Digit Benford Law (2BL) by Mebane (2006), the analysis consists of comparing the observed frequencies of numerals of candidate votes and party votes at the precinct level against the expected frequencies according to Benford’s Law. Four central findings stand out. First, there is no evidence for systematic fraud or mismanagement with regard to candidate votes from districts where fraud would be most instrumental. Second, at the state level (Bundesland), there are 51 violations in 190 tests of the party list votes. Third, East German states are not more prone to violations than Western ones. This finding refutes the notion that the East’s more recent transition to democracy poses problems in electoral management. Fourth, a strong variation in patterns of violation across Bundesländer exists: states with dominant party control are more likely to display irregularities. The article concludes by hypothesizing and exploring the notion that partisan composition of nominees involved in the counting may produce a higher likelihood of violation and be a cause of Länder variation. This may especially be the case when a party dominates in a Bundesland or opponents to the former socialist regime party are involved in the counting.


gesamter Thread:

RSS-Feed dieser Diskussion

Werbung