alarm-redist / fifty-states

Redistricting analysis for all 50 U.S. states
https://alarm-redist.github.io/fifty-states/
Other
9 stars 7 forks source link

2010 Arkansas Congressional Districts #147

Closed mzhao80 closed 1 year ago

mzhao80 commented 1 year ago

Redistricting requirements

In Arkansas, there are no state law requirements for congressional districts.

Interpretation of requirements

We enforce a maximum population deviation of 0.5%, which is in line with the low deviation seen in past congressional district maps. We limit the number of county/municipality splits, which is in line with the small number of county/municipality splits observed in past congressional district maps.

Data Sources

Data for Arkansas comes from the ALARM Project's Redistricting Data Files.

Pre-processing Notes

No manual pre-processing decisions were necessary.

Simulation Notes

We sample 5,000 districting plans for Arkansas across two independent runs of the SMC algorithm. No special techniques were needed to produce the sample.

Validation

validation_20221130_2008

SMC: 5,000 sampled plans of 4 districts on 2,784 units
`adapt_k_thresh`=0.985 • `seq_alpha`=0.5
`est_label_mult`=1 • `pop_temper`=0
ℹ Preparing WV shapefile
Plan diversity 80% range: 0.34 to 0.78
ℹ Preparing WV shapefile
R-hat values for summary statistics:
   pop_overlap      total_vap       plan_dev      comp_edge    comp_polsby      pop_white      pop_black 
     1.0009041      1.0038464      1.0003680      1.0010062      0.9998685      1.0004246      1.0004679 
      pop_hisp       pop_aian      pop_asian       pop_nhpi      pop_other        pop_two      vap_white 
     1.0005685      1.0001398      1.0004262      1.0008790      1.0014776      0.9999571      1.0003402 
     vap_black       vap_hisp       vap_aian      vap_asian       vap_nhpi      vap_other        vap_two 
     1.0004733      1.0003640      1.0002997      1.0013274      1.0007875      1.0015609      1.0011423 
pre_16_rep_tru pre_16_dem_cli pre_20_rep_tru pre_20_dem_bid uss_16_rep_boo uss_16_dem_eld uss_20_rep_cot 
     1.0005219      0.9999698      1.0005089      1.0000345      1.0005610      1.0006173      1.0004602 
uss_20_dem_har gov_18_rep_hut gov_18_dem_hen atg_18_rep_rut atg_18_dem_lee sos_18_rep_thu sos_18_dem_inm 
     1.0001425      1.0004244      1.0000224      1.0004619      1.0000548      1.0004431      0.9999958 
        adv_16         adv_18         adv_20         arv_16         arv_18         arv_20  county_splits 
     1.0002214      1.0000226      1.0001541      1.0005459      1.0004531      1.0004793      1.0039716 
   muni_splits            ndv            nrv        ndshare          e_dvs         pr_dem          e_dem 
     1.0040011      1.0000220      1.0005035      1.0001766      1.0001782      1.0004000      1.0000256 
         pbias           egap 
     0.9999162      1.0005349 

Sampling diagnostics for SMC run 1 of 2 (2,500 samples)
         Eff. samples (%) Acc. rate Log wgt. sd  Max. unique Est. k 
Split 1     2,424 (97.0%)     11.4%        0.35 1,596 (101%)     11 
Split 2     2,405 (96.2%)     14.9%        0.38 1,549 ( 98%)      7 
Split 3     2,373 (94.9%)      8.2%        0.47 1,393 ( 88%)      4 
Resample    1,997 (79.9%)       NA%        0.43 2,031 (129%)     NA 

Sampling diagnostics for SMC run 2 of 2 (2,500 samples)
         Eff. samples (%) Acc. rate Log wgt. sd  Max. unique Est. k 
Split 1     2,423 (96.9%)      7.1%        0.35 1,564 ( 99%)     18 
Split 2     2,409 (96.4%)     10.4%        0.38 1,580 (100%)     10 
Split 3     2,301 (92.1%)      5.9%        0.53 1,399 ( 89%)      6 
Resample    1,615 (64.6%)       NA%        0.50 1,964 (124%)     NA 

•  Watch out for low effective samples, very low acceptance rates (less than 1%), large std. devs. of the log
weights (more than 3 or so), and low numbers of unique plans. R-hat values for summary statistics should be
between 1 and 1.05.

Checklist

@CoryMcCartan

CoryMcCartan commented 1 year ago

Otherwise this looks great to me!