Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMcBurnett, Neal
dc.contributor.authorCarback, Richard T.
dc.contributor.authorChaum, David
dc.contributor.authorClark, Jeremy
dc.contributor.authorConway, John
dc.contributor.authorEssex, Aleksander
dc.contributor.authorHerrnson, Paul S.
dc.contributor.authorMayberry, Travis
dc.contributor.authorPopoveniuc, Stefan
dc.contributor.authorRivest, Ronald L.
dc.contributor.authorShen, Emily
dc.contributor.authorSherman, Alan T.
dc.contributor.authorVora, Poorvi L.
dc.date.accessioned2015-04-16T15:13:10Z
dc.date.available2015-04-16T15:13:10Z
dc.date.issued2014-12-28
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/96648
dc.description.abstractThis 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.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherCaltech/MIT Voting Technology Projecten_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesVTP Working Paper Series;126
dc.titleScantegrity Responds to Rice Study on Usability of the Scantegrity II Voting Systemen_US
dc.typeWorking Paperen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record