• VIC
  • QLD
  • SA
  • TAS
  • WA
  • ACT
  • NT
  • How to interpret the diagram

    Nodes on the left represent primary votes, sized in proportion to the votes received. Groups with more than about 0.3% of the vote are tracked individually, while the remaining parties and individuals are aggregated into Other groups node. Intermediate nodes are positioned in the order in which they are excluded from the count (or fill a quota with insufficient excess to continue). Up to this point they collect primary votes and any lower preferences that have thus far been distributed. After this point, their votes will be distributed as preferences to others. Nodes on the right are individual elected senators, plus nodes for unsuccessful and exhausted votes. First preference votes that contribute to a filled quota flow directly to the elected candidate. Intermediate nodes simply collect and distribute preferences in these cases.

    Some simplifications

    • Votes are counted, and preferences distributed, to individual candidates who are (usually) members of a group. I have aggregated votes and preference transfers to group level. Small transfers of preferences have been removed from the diagram, just to avoid making it more confusing than it already is. That will lead to an occasional discrepancy in the counts.


    Drag nodes to move them up or down. The initial placement of nodes results from an algorithm that tries to find the flow with the least entanglement. Rearranging the nodes may help to find a more visually pleasing configuration.

    Data for these diagrams was obtained from the AEC

    Thanks to Mike Bostock’s example of the Sankey plugin for D3.js.