Re: Hart InterCivic eSlate and eScan machines

From: David Jefferson <d_jefferson_at_yahoo_dot_com>
Date: Sun May 21 2006 - 19:44:52 CDT

Most optical scan systems, e.g. the Diebold AccuVote OS, parse the
paper ballot on the fly as the timing marks and voter ink marks move
under the heads, and they record only vote counts, not full records
of the votes on the ballot.

But some newer optical scan systems record an entire full-face TIFF
image of the ballot, which is later parsed offline using what we
might call OVR software (optical vote recognition). This is
theoretically superior, because in principle it allows different,
independent OVR software to extract votes from the same set of
images, and any differences can be brought to human attention. Of
course, in practice we don't have multiple independent OVR
algorithms processing the data. Also, if the original TIFF image is
bad because of an optical sensor limitation perhaps, such a problem
would not be detected.


On May 21, 2006, at 3:01 PM, Jerry Lobdill wrote:

> Thanks Joseph Hall and Jim Soper for the information. I'll read the
> reports carefully. Are these ballot "images" stored in some picture
> format or as a database record? (No need to answer if the info is
> already in the reports.)
> Given that these images are stored, would a tamperer have to change
> both the images and the running tally in order to be home free?
> Obviously, changes could be made to the tally while ignoring the
> ballot images in such a way that a recount would be improbable.
> Thanks,
> Jerry
> _______________________________________________
> OVC-discuss mailing list

David Jefferson

OVC-discuss mailing list
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
Received on Wed May 31 23:17:04 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed May 31 2006 - 23:17:07 CDT