Election Forensics: Vote Counts and Benford's Law¶
Mebane, Jr., W. R. (2006). Election Forensics: Vote Counts and Benford's Law: Vote Counts and Benford's Law.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Paradox of Unanimity
- In election and voting forensics, near-unanimous reported results in adversarial contexts function as evidence against legitimacy.
This sourceSecond-digit Benford's-law tests treat anomalous digit distributions in reported vote counts as quantitative signatures of fraud/irregularity, so suspiciously clean or anomalous near-unanimous returns count as evidence against legitimacy.
- In election and voting forensics, near-unanimous reported results in adversarial contexts function as evidence against legitimacy.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Not recorded. The single citation of this work carries no recorded support check.
Was it audited? Yes. A second, independent pass read the citation against the article text and recorded a verdict.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:89f1a174be6c · see in the full table