electoral-sim
A spatial voting simulator for comparing electoral systems under real-world-grounded electorate patterns.
Voter and candidate preferences are represented as vectors in [0,1]^N. The primary metric the simulator uses to judge how close each electoral system's outcome is to the geometric median of voter preferences — the central tendency most robust to outliers, although there are other metrics also available to use.
The simulation framework as well as some experimental results can be found in the Arxiv Preprint.
Implemented Electoral Systems
| System | Family |
|---|---|
| Plurality (FPTP) | Winner-take-all |
| Two-Round Runoff | Winner-take-all |
| Instant Runoff (IRV/RCV) | Ranked |
| Borda Count | Ranked/Scoring |
| Approval Voting | Approval |
| Score Voting | Scoring |
| Condorcet (Schulze) | Pairwise |
| Party-List PR (D'Hondt) | Proportional |
| Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) | Hybrid |
| Fractional Ballot (σ = 0.1, 0.3, 1.0) | Hypothetical benchmark |
The Fractional Ballot is a hypothetical system included as a theoretical benchmark. It is not currently implemented in any jurisdiction. Each voter's influence is distributed across candidates via a Boltzmann softmax over preference distances; see the paper for details.
Scenarios
Thirteen real-world-grounded electorate archetypes, including a higher-dimensional primary case:
| # | Name | Real-world analogue |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Unimodal Consensus | Nordic / consensus democracies |
| 2 | Polarized Bimodal | Contemporary USA, Brexit-era UK |
| 3 | Multimodal Fragmented | Netherlands, Israel, Italy |
| 4 | Dominant Party with Minorities | Japan (LDP), Hungary |
| 5 | Asymmetric Skewed | Latin American / post-Soviet patterns |
| 6 | Two-Party Symmetric Polarized | Stylised US two-party system |
| 7 | Two-Party Asymmetric Centrist Majority | Many European two-bloc systems |
| 8 | Two-Party Dominant Left | Dominant-party with formal primary process |
| 9 | Two-Party High Overlap | Low-polarization or catch-all party systems |
| 10 | Two-Party Diagonal Cross-Pressures | Coalitions split across economic and cultural axes |
| 11 | Factionalized Majority Party | Big-tent dominant parties with contested nominations |
| 12 | Three-Dimensional Primary Competition | Electorates split by economics, culture, and trust in institutions |
| 13 | Insurgent Outlier Candidate | Primary electorates with a highly energized insurgent wing |
Installation
Install from PyPI:
pip install electoral-simulator
For local development:
pip install -e ".[dev]"
Quick Start
import numpy as np
from electoral_sim.scenario import load_scenario
from electoral_sim.systems import get_all_systems
from electoral_sim.metrics import run_simulation
rng = np.random.default_rng(42)
config, electorate, candidates = load_scenario(
"configs/scenarios/02_polarized_bimodal.yaml", rng=rng
)
systems = get_all_systems(rng=rng)
metrics = run_simulation(electorate, candidates, systems)
for m in sorted(metrics, key=lambda x: x.distance_to_median):
print(f"{m.system_name:35s} d_median={m.distance_to_median:.4f}"
f" majority_sat={m.majority_satisfaction:.3f}")
Notebooks
The repository includes a growing notebook collection covering quickstarts,
social choice theory, and simulation-driven political questions. A guided index
is available in notebooks/README.md, including experimental notebooks on
topics like strategic voting, fractional-ballot robustness, primary dynamics,
and majority-versus-minority welfare.
CLI Runner
The package also ships with a lightweight command-line interface for running scenarios without opening a notebook.
List the built-in system keys:
electoral-sim list-systems
List available scenario files:
electoral-sim list-scenarios
Run a scenario with the default suite of implemented systems:
electoral-sim run configs/scenarios/02_polarized_bimodal.yaml --seed 42
Run a smaller comparison with selected systems only:
electoral-sim run configs/scenarios/02_polarized_bimodal.yaml \
--system plurality,score,irv \
--seed 42 \
--sort-by distance_to_median
Include the Fractional Ballot benchmark systems:
electoral-sim run configs/scenarios/02_polarized_bimodal.yaml \
--include-fractional \
--fractional-variant both \
--fractional-sigmas 0.1,0.3,1.0
Machine-readable output is available in both JSON and CSV:
electoral-sim run configs/scenarios/02_polarized_bimodal.yaml \
--system plurality,score \
--format json
Adding a New System
Subclass ElectoralSystem and implement a single run method:
from electoral_sim.systems import ElectoralSystem
from electoral_sim.types import ElectionResult
class MySystem(ElectoralSystem):
name = "My System"
def run(self, ballots, candidates) -> ElectionResult:
# ballots.plurality_votes, ballots.rankings, ballots.scores,
# ballots.approvals, ballots.distances are all available
winner_idx = ...
return self._make_result(winner_idx, candidates)
Adding a New Scenario
Create a YAML file in configs/scenarios/:
name: "My Scenario"
real_world_analog: "Description"
n_voters: 5000
electorate:
type: gaussian_mixture
components:
- weight: 0.6
mean: [0.65, 0.55]
std: [0.10, 0.08]
- weight: 0.4
mean: [0.30, 0.40]
std: [0.10, 0.08]
candidates:
- {label: "Candidate A", position: [0.70, 0.60]}
- {label: "Candidate B", position: [0.50, 0.48]}
- {label: "Candidate C", position: [0.25, 0.35]}
If you want to track demographic or coalition-level welfare, electorate
components can also carry optional group labels. Multiple components may
share the same label, which is useful when one group has internal ideological
variation:
electorate:
type: gaussian_mixture
components:
- weight: 0.30
mean: [0.20, 0.40]
cov: [[0.01, 0.00], [0.00, 0.01]]
group: Group A
- weight: 0.20
mean: [0.40, 0.60]
cov: [[0.01, 0.00], [0.00, 0.01]]
group: Group A
- weight: 0.50
mean: [0.75, 0.50]
cov: [[0.01, 0.00], [0.00, 0.01]]
group: Group B
When no group labels are provided, scenarios behave exactly as before.
Voting Strategies
Ballots can be generated under different voting strategies by passing a
strategy model to run_simulation(...).
The currently available strategy models are:
| Strategy | Description |
|---|---|
SincereStrategy |
Ballots are derived directly from preference distances |
PluralityCompromiseStrategy |
Voters may abandon non-viable favourites under plurality |
ApprovalThresholdStrategy |
Voters approve candidates above a utility threshold |
ScoreMaxMinStrategy |
Voters exaggerate scores to a max-min scale |
RankedTruncationStrategy |
Voters submit only the top portion of a ranking |
RankedBuryingStrategy |
Voters demote a strong rival to the bottom of the ranking |
TurnoutStrategy |
Some voters abstain while participants vote sincerely |
If no strategy is specified, run_simulation(...) uses SincereStrategy.
Use a strategy explicitly in the Python API:
import numpy as np
from electoral_sim.scenario import load_scenario
from electoral_sim.metrics import run_simulation
from electoral_sim.systems import Plurality
from electoral_sim.strategies import PluralityCompromiseStrategy
rng = np.random.default_rng(42)
config, electorate, candidates = load_scenario(
"configs/scenarios/02_polarized_bimodal.yaml", rng=rng
)
metrics = run_simulation(
electorate,
candidates,
systems=[Plurality()],
strategy=PluralityCompromiseStrategy(
compromise_rate=1.0,
viability_threshold=0.15,
frontrunner_count=2,
rng=rng,
),
)
Other strategies are selected in the same way:
from electoral_sim.metrics import run_simulation
from electoral_sim.strategies import (
ApprovalThresholdStrategy,
RankedTruncationStrategy,
ScoreMaxMinStrategy,
TurnoutStrategy,
)
from electoral_sim.systems import ApprovalVoting, InstantRunoff, ScoreVoting
approval_metrics = run_simulation(
electorate,
candidates,
systems=[ApprovalVoting()],
strategy=ApprovalThresholdStrategy(utility_threshold=0.65),
)
score_metrics = run_simulation(
electorate,
candidates,
systems=[ScoreVoting()],
strategy=ScoreMaxMinStrategy(utility_threshold=0.7),
)
ranked_metrics = run_simulation(
electorate,
candidates,
systems=[InstantRunoff()],
strategy=RankedTruncationStrategy(max_ranked=3),
)
turnout_metrics = run_simulation(
electorate,
candidates,
systems=[ApprovalVoting()],
strategy=TurnoutStrategy(turnout_probability=0.8),
)
To provide explicit polling information or other strategic context, pass a
VotingContext alongside the strategy:
import numpy as np
from electoral_sim.metrics import run_simulation
from electoral_sim.strategies import PluralityCompromiseStrategy, VotingContext
from electoral_sim.systems import Plurality
context = VotingContext(
poll_shares=np.array([0.42, 0.18, 0.40]),
)
metrics = run_simulation(
electorate,
candidates,
systems=[Plurality()],
strategy=PluralityCompromiseStrategy(),
context=context,
)
Spatial Reporting Models
The repository also includes practical reporting models for experiments where a system does not observe voters' true spatial positions directly.
This is mainly useful for the fractional ballot benchmark, where one may want to compare the truthful result with outcomes produced from noisy or strategic reported positions.
The currently available reporting models are:
| Reporting model | Description |
|---|---|
HonestReporting |
Uses true voter positions unchanged |
GaussianNoiseReporting |
Adds symmetric random noise to reported positions |
BiasedNoiseReporting |
Applies a systematic shift to selected voters, optionally with noise |
DirectionalExaggerationReporting |
Moves selected voters away from or toward chosen candidates |
CoalitionMisreporting |
Pulls a selected bloc toward a shared false target position |
Selectors can be used to target only part of the electorate, for example with
axis_threshold(...), within_radius(...), nearest_to_candidate(...), or
candidate_supporters(...).
Use the reporting helpers in the Python API like this:
import numpy as np
from electoral_sim.fractional import FractionalBallotDiscrete
from electoral_sim.fractional_reporting import run_fractional_reporting_simulation
from electoral_sim.reporting import BiasedNoiseReporting, GaussianNoiseReporting, axis_threshold
run = run_fractional_reporting_simulation(
electorate,
candidates,
system=FractionalBallotDiscrete(sigma=0.3),
reporting_model=GaussianNoiseReporting(noise_std=0.05, rng=np.random.default_rng(42)),
)
targeted_run = run_fractional_reporting_simulation(
electorate,
candidates,
system=FractionalBallotDiscrete(sigma=0.3),
reporting_model=BiasedNoiseReporting(
bias=np.array([0.06, 0.0]),
selector=axis_threshold(0, 0.45, side="le"),
),
)
print(run.truthful_result.winner_indices, run.reported_result.winner_indices)
print(run.robustness.outcome_shift, run.robustness.winner_changed)
Group Welfare Metrics
Electorates can optionally carry per-voter group labels, which makes it possible to evaluate how different electoral systems affect different groups through the same welfare lens used elsewhere in the package.
This support is backward compatible:
- if no group labels are present, the rest of the simulator works exactly as before
- existing overall metrics such as
distance_to_medianandmean_voter_distanceare unchanged - group-aware analysis is available only when you opt into labeled electorates
Use compute_group_metrics(...) on an election result to get per-group mean
distance to the outcome, worst-case distance, majority satisfaction, population
share, welfare, and simple disparity summaries:
from electoral_sim.ballots import BallotProfile
from electoral_sim.metrics import compute_group_metrics
from electoral_sim.systems import Plurality
ballots = BallotProfile.from_preferences(electorate, candidates)
result = Plurality().run(ballots, candidates)
group_summary = compute_group_metrics(result, electorate, candidates)
for group in group_summary.groups:
print(
group.group_name,
group.population_share,
group.mean_voter_distance,
group.majority_satisfaction,
)
print(group_summary.max_mean_distance_gap)
print(group_summary.min_group_welfare)
Running Tests
pytest tests/ -v
Project Structure
electoral_sim/
├── cli.py # Command-line runner
├── strategies/ # Sincere and strategic ballot-generation models
├── reporting/ # Honest, noisy, and adversarial spatial reporting models
├── electorate/ # Voter distribution generation (Gaussian, GMM, uniform)
├── candidates/ # Candidate positioning in [0,1]^N
├── ballots/ # BallotProfile: all ballot types from preference vectors
├── systems/ # Electoral system implementations, including PR variants
├── fractional.py # Fractional Ballot (hypothetical benchmark)
├── fractional_reporting.py # Helpers for reported-position fractional experiments
├── metrics/ # Distance metrics, Monte Carlo runner
├── primaries/ # Two-party primary pipeline
├── scenario.py # YAML scenario loader
├── utils/ # Visualization helpers
└── types.py # ElectionResult dataclass
configs/
└── scenarios/ # Built-in scenario definitions
notebooks/
tests/ # Unit tests for simulator, visualization, and CLI behaviour
Companion repo
If you want a more user-friendly way to create scenarios, check out the companion repo electoral_scenario_studio for natural-language authoring, iterative refinement, and visual scenario editing before running comparisons in electoral_sim.
Citation
If you use this package in your research, please cite:
@misc{mukherjee2026electoralsystemssimulatoropen,
title={Electoral Systems Simulator: An Open Framework for Comparing Electoral Mechanisms Across Voter Distribution Scenarios},
author={Sumit Mukherjee},
year={2026},
eprint={2603.08752},
archivePrefix={arXiv},
primaryClass={cs.GT},
url={https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.08752},
}
Release files for electoral-simulator 0.2.0
For a detailed explanation of source distributions (sdists) and built distributions (wheels), please see the package formats documentation.
Source distribution (sdist)
| File | Size | Uploaded | |
|---|---|---|---|
| electoral_simulator-0.2.0.tar.gz | 87.8 kB | Details |
Built distribution (wheel)
| File | Interpreter | ABI | Platform | Reset |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| electoral_simulator-0.2.0-py3-none-any.whl | Python 3 | none | any | Details |
Total release size: 180.0 kB
Release files / electoral_simulator-0.2.0.tar.gz
| Download URL | electoral_simulator-0.2.0.tar.gz |
|---|---|
| Size | 87.8 kB |
| Tags | Source |
|
SHA-256 checksum How to use checksums |
430601b6488ff2a1ac303d0adfc58b650cd50187ed8d0cf8dee945cb72d74a8f
|
|
BLAKE2b-256 checksum How to use checksums |
8f175048cafa56179b74b77d748338077463dbd75dc1f50536f95e87e25327c0
|
| Upload date | |
|
Uploaded using Trusted Publishing? What is trusted publishing? |
Yes |
| Uploaded via |
twine/6.1.0 CPython/3.13.12
|
Provenance
Provenance describes where a file came from. On PyPI, provenance is shared via attestations, which provide a verifiable record of the build or publishing details. View details, limitations and caveats.
PyPI Publish Attestation
PyPI verified that this artifact, at this checksum, originated from the publisher listed below.
Signed by GitHub Actions, verified by PyPI on Apr 10, 2026.
Transparency logRelease files / electoral_simulator-0.2.0-py3-none-any.whl
| Download URL | electoral_simulator-0.2.0-py3-none-any.whl |
|---|---|
| Size | 92.3 kB |
| Tags | Python 3 |
|
SHA-256 checksum How to use checksums |
86092ac7ac0e60002bf1e47c72b93eb469f8613043b9765bbb6c3aac0c36982d
|
|
BLAKE2b-256 checksum How to use checksums |
bd489de8d7b74e4e2740cb12fc27107cf9e32426c059384c06e8f0f879726b44
|
| Upload date | |
|
Uploaded using Trusted Publishing? What is trusted publishing? |
Yes |
| Uploaded via |
twine/6.1.0 CPython/3.13.12
|
Provenance
Provenance describes where a file came from. On PyPI, provenance is shared via attestations, which provide a verifiable record of the build or publishing details. View details, limitations and caveats.
PyPI Publish Attestation
PyPI verified that this artifact, at this checksum, originated from the publisher listed below.
Signed by GitHub Actions, verified by PyPI on Apr 10, 2026.
Transparency log