Latest Research from the VTP

Towards Secure Quadratic Voting

Working Paper No.: 
128
Date Published: 
04/22/2016
Author(s): 
Sunoo Park
Ronald L. Rivest

A Population Model of Voter Registration and Deadwood

Working Paper No.: 
127
Date Published: 
04/03/2016
Author(s): 
Stephen Pettigrew
Charles Stewart III

Auditability and Verifiability of Elections

Date Published: 
12/03/2015
Author(s): 
Ronald L. Rivest

On October 27, 2015, Ronald L. Rivest gave an invited talk at Georgia Tech entitled, "Auditability and Verifiability of Elections".  A link to an abstract, the slides, and a YouTube recording are here:  http://people.csail.mit.edu/rivest/pubs.html#Riv15y

Managing Polling Place Resources Report

Date Published: 
11/13/2015
Author(s): 
Charles Stewart III

Scantegrity Responds to Rice Study on Usability of the Scantegrity II Voting System

Working Paper No.: 
126
Date Published: 
12/28/2014
Author(s): 
Neal McBurnett, Richard T. Carback, David Chaum, Jeremy Clark, John Conway, Aleksander Essex, Paul S. Herrnson, Travis Mayberry, Stefan Popoveniuc, Ronald L. Rivest, Emily Shen, Alan T. Sherman, and Poorvi L. Vora

This note is a response to, and critique of, recent work by Acemyan, Kortum, Bryne, and Wallach regarding the usability of end-to-end verifiable voting systems, and in particular, to their analysis of the usability of the Scantegrity II voting system. Their work is given in a JETS paper [Ace14] and was presented at EVT/WOTE 2014; it was also described in an associated press release [Rut14]. We find that their study lacked an appropriate control voting system with which to compare effectiveness, and thus their conclusions regarding Scantegrity II are unsupported by the evidence they present. Furthermore, their conclusions are contradicted by the successful deployment experiences of Scantegrity II at Takoma Park.

Recently Released GAO Report

Date Published: 
09/30/2014
Author(s): 
United States Government Accountability Office

See www.gao.gov/products/GAO-14-850. Professor Stewart's data is cited in their report!

The Measure of American Elections

Date Published: 
07/01/2014
Author(s): 
Barry C. Burden
Charles Stewart, III

Mitigating Coercion, Maximizing Confidence in Postal Elections

Author(s): 
Jacob Quinn Shenker
R. Michael Alvarez
Journal: 
USENIX Journal of Election Technology and Systems (JETS)
Link to Article: 
Date Published: 
07/01/2014

Partisanship and Voter Confidence, 2000-2012

Working Paper No.: 
125
Date Published: 
06/01/2014
Author(s): 
Michael W. Sances, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Charles Stewart III, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Abstract:  To what degree is voter confidence in election procedures driven by satisfaction with the outcome of an election, as opposed to trust in government or objective features of the polling place, such as voting technology?  Using approximately 30 national surveys over the past decade, we find a consistent relationship between voting for the winner and confidence in election administration.  This confidence varies as a function of question wording and electoral context.  Respondents are more confident in the quality of the vote count locally than nationally.  They are

Pages