The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Generalizations of Polya's urn Problem
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“In the copying model (Mitzenmacher 2004; Easley, J. Kleinberg, et al. 2010; Chung et al. 2003), α ≈ 2 corresponds to near-pure preferential attachment ( γ → 0) in a one-edge-per-arrival regime, where each impression or recommendation resolves into a single allocation of attention - predominantly steered toward already-popular creators, with a small net exploratory component.”
From "Rich-Get-Richer"? Platform Attention and Earnings Inequality using Patreon Earnings Data (2025) · cites this paper as Chung et al. 2003
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
"Rich-Get-Richer"? Platform Attention and Earnings Inequality using Patreon Earnings Data
Strauss, I., Yang, J., & Mazzucato, M. (2025) · arXiv
Metadata
- Authors
- Chung, F., Handjani, S., & Jungreis, D.
- Venue
- Annals of Combinatorics
- Published
- 2003-07-01
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 141-153
- ISSN
- 0218-0006
- 0219-3094
- Cited by
- 73
- References
- 0
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Generalizations of Polya's urn Problem. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s00026-003-0178-y
- The paper
- Chung, F., Handjani, S., & Jungreis, D. (2003). Generalizations of Polya's urn Problem. Annals of Combinatorics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00026-003-0178-y
