<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>A Mathematical Analysis of the 2022 Alaska Special Election for US House · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2209.04764/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2209.04764/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>A Mathematical Analysis of the 2022 Alaska Special Election for US House — mentioned by amavect</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47508430</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2209.04764:47508430</guid><pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2026 20:11:26 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Can you share some actual evidence for your case? I really don&amp;#x27;t believe it. The anti-RCV story about Alaska 2022 holds that Palin spoiled round 1 of the instant runoff by splitting the vote with Begich, causing Begich to drop out. RCV only beats vote-for-one, unless you can make a convincing case otherwise. https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.04764v3 (Yes, I agree with the conclusion of this paper, but I argue that we can do better with Approval or STAR.) Basic modelling on a 2D political compass gives a Yee diagram, demonstrating RCV&amp;#x27;s counterintuitive results. Yeah, that&amp;#x27;s theory, but Alaska 2022…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2209.04764/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>econ.GN</category></item></channel></rss>
