Changes

=====2004 elections=====

=====2004 elections=====

After the presidential recall referendum of 2004 in Venezuela, a controversy was raised about the use of electronic voting (SAES voting machines). Studies following the 2004 Venezuela recall elections found that Smartmatic's network was "bi-directional" with data being able to be transferred both ways between Smartmatic devices and the telecommunications company CANTV, with alleged irregularities found between the Smartmatic and Venezuela's National Electoral Council election results.<ref name="EUtulio">{{cite news|url=http://www.eluniversal.com/2004/09/11/imp_opi_art_11490D.shtml|title=Fraude y posibilidad de rectificación|last1=Salgueiro|first1=Adolfo P.|date=11 September 2004|work=El Universal (Caracas)|accessdate=}}</ref> Other independent election monitors claimed electoral fraud and submitted appeals, and statistical evaluations including a peer-reviewed article in 2006<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Cordero|first1=Maria M. Febres|last2=Márquez|first2=Bernardo|year=2007|title=A Statistical Approach to Assess Referendum Results: The Venezuelan Recall Referendum 2004|journal=International Statistical Review|volume=74|issue=3|pages=379–389|citeseerx=10.1.1.379.441|doi=10.1111/j.1751-5823.2006.tb00301.x}}</ref> and a special section of 6-peer-reviewed article in 2011<ref name="specialsection">[http://projecteuclid.org/DPubS?service=UI&version=1.0&verb=Display&page=toc&handle=euclid.ss/1330437927 Special Section: Revisiting the 2004 Venezuelan Referendum] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120728043017/http://projecteuclid.org/DPubS?service=UI&version=1.0&verb=Display&page=toc&handle=euclid.ss%2F1330437927|date=2012-07-28}}, ''Statistical Science'', 26(4), November 2011</ref> concluded that it was likely that electronic election fraud had been committed.  

After the presidential recall referendum of 2004 in Venezuela, a controversy was raised about the use of electronic voting (SAES voting machines). Studies following the 2004 Venezuela recall elections found that Smartmatic's network was "bi-directional" with data being able to be transferred both ways between Smartmatic devices and the telecommunications company CANTV, with alleged irregularities found between the Smartmatic and Venezuela's National Electoral Council election results.<ref name="EUtulio">{{cite news|url=http://www.eluniversal.com/2004/09/11/imp_opi_art_11490D.shtml|title=Fraude y posibilidad de rectificación|last1=Salgueiro|first1=Adolfo P.|date=11 September 2004|work=El Universal (Caracas)|accessdate=}}</ref> Other independent election monitors claimed electoral fraud and submitted appeals, and statistical evaluations including a peer-reviewed article in 2006<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Cordero|first1=Maria M. Febres|last2=Márquez|first2=Bernardo|year=2007|title=A Statistical Approach to Assess Referendum Results: The Venezuelan Recall Referendum 2004|journal=International Statistical Review|volume=74|issue=3|pages=379–389|citeseerx=10.1.1.379.441|doi=10.1111/j.1751-5823.2006.tb00301.x}}</ref> and a special section of 6-peer-reviewed article in 2011<ref name="specialsection">[http://projecteuclid.org/DPubS?service=UI&version=1.0&verb=Display&page=toc&handle=euclid.ss/1330437927 Special Section: Revisiting the 2004 Venezuelan Referendum] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120728043017/http://projecteuclid.org/DPubS?service=UI&version=1.0&verb=Display&page=toc&handle=euclid.ss%2F1330437927|date=2012-07-28}}, ''Statistical Science'', 26(4), November 2011</ref> concluded that it was likely that electronic election fraud had been committed.

 

After 4 years of research and 3 years of undergoing intensive peer review, mathematics Professor Gustavo Delfino’s published a paper in the highly respected ''Statistical Science'' journal, November 2011 issue (Volume 26, Number 4) with the title ''Analysis of the 2004 Venezuela Referendum: The Official Results Versus the Petition Signatures.'' The intensive study used multiple mathematical approaches to ascertain the voting results found in the 2004 Venezuelan referendum. Delfino and his research partners discovered not only the algorithm used to manipulate the results, but also the precise location in the election processing sequence where vulnerability in machine processing would provide such an opportunity. According to Prof Delfino, the magnitude of the difference between the official and the true result in Venezuela estimated at 1,370,000 votes.

=====2005 elections=====

=====2005 elections=====