This story was printed from ZDNet
Story
URL: http://news.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/emergingtech/0,39020357,39174381,00.htm
Robert Lemos
CNET News.com
November 19, 2004, 09:30
GMT
Researchers at the
The report, by four U.C. Berkeley researchers,
analysed the statistical relationships between
The group stressed that the results were not
proof of any errors in counting the vote, but merely suggested that some link
existed between the type of machine used to tally votes and the margin by which
President Bush won.
"Without a paper trail, statistical
comparisons of jurisdictions that used e-voting are the only tool available to
diagnose problems with the new technology," the researchers stated in the
report.
The paper was authored by Michael Hout, a
professor of sociology at U.C. Berkeley, and three other researchers. The
analysis found a statistical relationship between electronic voting machines
and votes for President Bush, which seems to have accounted for anywhere from
130,000 votes to 260,000 votes. Hout was not immediately available for comment.
While some problems with election machines have
surfaced after 2 November, none has been deemed a major issue that could affect
the outcome of the election. According to the Web site of
That has not stopped liberal groups from taking
issues with the results. Strange statistical anomalies in
However, political science professors at
"We conclude that allegation is
baseless," wrote Walter Mebane, professor of political science at
However, Samuel Wang, an assistant professor of
molecular biology at
"I am not prone to conspiracy
theories," he said in an email to CNET News.com. "For instance, I
think allegations about
The
"Their analysis indicates that even when
all these variables are accounted for, a significant difference remains between
counties that used electronic voting and counties that used optical scanning or
paper ballots," he said.
Wang's own analysis, using different methods,
estimated that e-voting machines inexplicitly favoured Bush by 270,000 votes,
he said.
Neither analysis tries to explain what may
account for the statistical departure from the expected results of the
election. However, they do list several possibilities.
"Mechanisms that would produce this outcome
include having votes electronically registered in the machine prior to any
voters using the machine or after the last voter users it -- through software
errors or hacking -- and other flaws that interfere with counting after some
limit is reached," the report stated.