Closed CoryMcCartan closed 2 years ago
Thoughts on what's going on with municipalities here? It seems just a tad high. A reduction of 3 or so would set it more squarely in the middle 90% of the sample.
We have a Gibbs constraint going but had to weaken it to get convergence. But we are more in the middle for county splits as a result (cf https://github.com/alarm-redist/fifty-states/pull/68). On balance no worse than the last sample I think
Fair point, this does balance county splits better here. Not much to be done (absent ad-hoc merging) on that balance. This also has much improved diversity with this balancing.
Redistricting requirements
In Pennsylvania, there are few formal districting requirements, but districts must generally:
Interpretation of requirements
We enforce a maximum population deviation of 0.5%. We apply a county/municipality constraint, as described below.
Data Sources
Data for Pennsylvania comes from the ALARM Project's 2020 Redistricting Data Files.
Pre-processing Notes
No manual pre-processing decisions were necessary.
Simulation Notes
We sample 10,000 districting plans for Pennsylvania across two runs of the SMC algorithm, then filter down to 5,000 total plans. To balance county and municipality splits, we create pseudocounties for use in the county constraint. These are counties, outside of Allegheny County, Montgomery County, and Philadelphia County. Within Allegheny County, Montgomery County, and Philadelphia County, each municipality is its own pseudocounty as well. These counties were chosen since they are necessarily split by congressional districts. We also apply an additional Gibbs constraint to further avoid splitting municipalities.
Validation
Performance:![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2958471/174502739-64a95f3f-4101-4a05-bac0-feb19b6c0ea9.png)
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@christopherkenny