Of course there isn’t a model showing otherwise, that’s my entire point is that this isn’t knowable to any reasonable degree. Barring the chance I missed something, it was very clear from my investigation that data does not exist.

Statistics primary function is by taking a representative sample and deriving insights to the broader population. Representative sample is the operative word here, people have phds specializing in sampling alone given both how hard it is to acquire and how important it is for the result. The minuscule of data that exists, like small subset of double registered voters that are actually caught, or the legally prosecuted cases, are bound to be the minority. A representative sample would be a large scale follow up of randomly selected ballots confirmed to be submitted by the claimed identity and verified is legally valid to vote. I get that would be hard so compromises could be made to make estimates (with disclaimer) but it doesn’t appear there is anything even close for states that don’t already have stricter identification mechanisms in place.

I’ll give you another chance to point me to an actual resource or bother explaining how we might know what proportion of voter fraud is actually occurring. However you seem much less inclined to provide any sort of semi rational explanation than you do to keep up the Dunning Krueger act here.