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.
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
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.
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
Checklist
TODO
lines from the template code have been removedenforce_style()
to format my coderedist_map
andredist_plans
objects, and summary statistics) have been edited@CoryMcCartan