Cited by 111Ethics and Social Impacts of AIBig Data Technologies and ApplicationsE-Government and Public Services

The Tyranny of Data? The Bright and Dark Sides of Data-Driven Decision-Making for Social Good

Open access
Lepri, Bruno, Staiano, Jacopo, Sangokoya, David, Letouzé, Emmanuel, Oliver, Nuria·2017·Studies in Big Data

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/978-3-319-54024-5_1

Cites

106 of 106 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Currently, the literature relies unilaterally on convenience datasets, often from the UCI repository or similar with limited industry context and engagement.

    “Currently, the literature relies unilaterally on convenience datasets (enabling comparative studies), often from the UCI repository [13] or similar with limited industry context and engagement [193,286,287].”

    From Fairness in machine learning: A survey (2024) · cites this paper as [193]

  • Critics of current research argue that efforts will fail unless contextual, sociocultural, and social policy challenges are better understood.

    “However, beyond this, critics of current research [50,193,266,286,287,297,297,306] argue that eforts will fail unless contextual, sociocultural, and social policy challenges are better understood.”

    From Fairness in machine learning: A survey (2024) · cites this paper as [193]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

5 of the 111 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. D.K. Citron and F. Pasquale. The scored society. Washington Law Review, 89(1):1- 33, 2014.
  2. K. Crawford and J. Schultz. Big data and due process: Toward a framework to redress predictive privacy harms. Boston College Law Review, 55(1):93-128, 2014.
  3. A.G. Ferguson. Crime mapping and the fourth amendment: Redrawing high-crime areas. Hastings Law Journal, 63:179-232, 2012.
  4. J. Staiano, N. Oliver, B. Lepri, R. de Oliveira, M. Caraviello, and N. Sebe. Money walks: a human-centric study on the economics of personal mobile data. In Proceed- ings of the 2014 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing, pages 583-594. ACM, 2014.
  5. L. Sweeney. Discrimination in online ad delivery. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2208240, 2013.
  6. Z. Tufekci. Algorithmic harms beyond facebook and google: Emergent challenges of computational agency. Colorado Technology Law Journal, 13:203-218, 2015.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lepri, B., Staiano, J., Sangokoya, D., Letouzé, E., & Oliver, N.
Affiliations
  • Fondazione Bruno Kessler (IT)
  • MIT Media Lab (US)
Corresponding author
Lepri, Bruno
Venue
Studies in Big Data
Published
2017
Pages
3-24
ISSN
  • 2197-6503 (ISSN-L)
  • 2197-6511
OpenAlex
W2558100504
Cited by
111
References
111
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 2
FWCI
44.46
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Studies in big data (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Big Data Technologies and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › E-Government and Public Services
Keywords
data-driven decision making, algorithmic decision-making, social good, algorithmic transparency, accountability, privacy preservation, living labs, citizen participation, public safety, access to finance, fair employment, predictive analytics, human behavior analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review