What the Numbers Say: A Digit-Based Test for Election Fraud

By Bernd Beber, Alexandra Scacco. Political Analysis, 2012

176 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

An Informed Forensics Approach to Detecting Vote Irregularities (2015, methodology): “Beber and Scacco (2012) show that individuals fabricating numbers exhibit a preference for pairs of adjacent digits, suggesting that such pairs (e.g., twenty-three) should be overly abundant in fraudulent vote tallies.”
“Close but no Cigar”: the measurement of corruption* (2014, background): “…“second-digit Benford’s law” (2BL) tests, which apply essentially the same logic as the general Benford’s law specifically to the second digit of electoral return numbers (see Mebane 2006a, 2006b, 2011; Breunig and Goerres 2011; see also Beber and Scacco 2012; but cf. Deckert et al. 2011).”
Fraudulent Democracy? An Analysis of Argentina's Infamous Decade Using Supervised Machine Learning (2011, methodology): “More generally, our findings demonstrate the feasibility of generating and using synthetic data for training and testing an electoral fraud detection system.”