Cited by 385Computability, Logic, AI AlgorithmsBig Data Technologies and ApplicationsPhilosophy of Biology and Scientific Explanation

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Deluge of Spurious Correlations in Big Data

Open access
Calude, Cristian S., Longo, Giuseppe·2017·Foundations of Science

Overview

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/s10699-016-9489-4

Cites

Statistics

Verification

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?

  • Too many features will likely lead to an overfitted model containing spurious features.

    “too many features will likely lead to an over fi tted model which contains features, which are spurious (Graham et al . 1990; Calude & Longo 2017)”

    From Human Judgment in algorithmic loops: Individual justice and automated decision‐making (2022) · cites this paper as Calude & Longo 2017

    The discussion following Section 6 says that big databases contain mostly spurious regularities, and Section 9 says mining larger databases increases the risk of misleading correlations. That supports the concern about spurious patterns, but the paper does not establish that adding features leads to an overfitted model; its argument concerns database size, not feature count. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Large datasets are more likely to produce statistically significant results when comparing means and distributions between populations, as well as spurious correlations between variables, especially for complex, real-world observations.

    “Large datasets are more likely to produce statistically significant results when comparing means and distributions between populations, as well as spurious correlations between variables, especially for complex, real-world observations (Calude and Longo 2017.”

    From Unethical Numbers? A Meta-analysis of Library Learning Analytics Studies (2019) · cites this paper as Calude and Longo 2017

    Section 3 states that larger datasets yield more arbitrary, meaningless correlations, and Section 9 says mining bigger databases increases the risk of spurious regularities. The paper also discusses the difficulty of interpreting patterns in real-life phenomena (section 13). Our copy does not establish the separate claim that larger datasets are more likely to produce statistically significant differences in means or distributions between populations. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 39

  1. Andrews, G. E. (2012). Drowning in the data deluge. Notices of the AMS: American Mathematical Society, 59(7), 933–941. · DOI
  2. Calude, C. (2002). Information and randomness–An algorithmic perspective (2nd ed.). Berlin: Springer. · DOI
  3. Calude, C. S., & Longo, G. (2015). Classical, quantum and biological randomness as relative. Natural Computing. doi:10.1007/s11047-015-9533-2 · DOI
  4. Cecconi, F., Cencini, M., Falcioni, M., & Vulpiani, A. (2012). Predicting the future from the past: An old problem from a modern perspective. American Journal of Physics, 80(11), 1001–1008. · DOI
  5. Chibbaro, S., Rondoni, L., & Vulpiani, A. (2014). Reductionism, emergence and levels of reality. Berlin: Springer. · DOI
  6. Cooper, S. B. (2004). Computability theory. London: Chapman Hall/CRC.
  7. Devaney, R. L. (2003). An introduction to chaotic dynamical systems (2nd ed.). Redwood City, CA: Addison-Wesley.
  8. Downey, R., & Hirschfeldt, D. (2010). Algorithmic randomness and complexity. Berlin: Springer. · DOI
  9. Ellis, G., & Silk, J. (2014). Scientific method: Defend the integrity of physics. Nature, 516, 321–323. · DOI
  10. Ferber, R. (1956). Are correlations any guide to predictive value? Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C (Applied Statistics), 5(2), 113–121.
  11. Floridi, L. (2012). Big data and their epistemological challenge. Philosophy and Technology, 25(4), 435–437. · DOI
  12. Frické, M. (2015). Big data and its epistemology. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(4), 651–661. · DOI
  13. Gisin, N. (2014). Quantum chance: Nonlocality, teleportation and other quantum marvels. London: Springer. · DOI
  14. Gowers, T. (2001). A new proof of Szemerédi’s theorem. Geometric and Functional Analysis, 11(3), 465–588. · DOI
  15. Graham, R. (2007). Some of my favorite problems in Ramsey theory. INTEGERS: The Electronic Journal of Combinatorial Number Theory, 7(2), A2.
  16. Graham, R., Rothschild, B. L., & Spencer, J. H. (1990). Ramsey theory (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
  17. Graham, R., & Spencer, J. H. (1990). Ramsey theory. Scientific American, 262, 112–117. · DOI · Paper page
  18. Grjebine, A. (2015). La dette publique et comment s’en débarrasser. Paris: Press Universitaire de France. · DOI
  19. Kac, M. (1947). On the notion of recurrence in discrete stochastic processes. Bulletin of the AMS: American Mathematical Society, 53, 1002–1010. · DOI
  20. Khoussainov, B. (2016). Algorithmically random universal algebras. In M. Burgin & C. S. Calude (Eds.), Information and complexity. World Scientific Series in Information Studies, Singapore, 2016 (to appear). · DOI
  21. Kitchin, R. (2014). Big data, new epistemologies and paradigm shifts. Big Data & Society, 1(1), 1–12. · DOI · Paper page
  22. Longo, G., & Montévil, M. (2014). Perspectives on organisms: Biological time, symmetries and singularities. Berlin: Springer. · DOI · Paper page
  23. Lynch, P. (2008). The origins of computer weather prediction and climate modeling. Journal of Computational Physics, 227(3431), 3431–3444. · DOI
  24. Manin, Y. I. (2016). Cognition and complexity. In M. Burgin & C. S. Calude (Eds.), Information and complexity. World Scientific Series in Information Studies, Singapore, 2016 (to appear).
  25. Montelle, C. (2011). Chasing shadows: Mathematics, astronomy, and the early history of eclipse reckoning. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. · DOI
  26. Needham, J. (2008). Science and civilisation in China: Medicine (Vol. 6). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  27. Oxford Dictionaries. Spurious. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/learner/spurious. Accessed November 30, 2015.
  28. Paris, J., & Harrington, L. (1977). A mathematical incompleteness in Peano Arithmetic. In J. Barwise (Ed.), Handbook of mathematical logic (pp. 1133–1142). Amsterdam: North Holland. · DOI
  29. Rajaraman, A., & Ullman, J. D. (2011). Mining of massive datasets. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. · DOI
  30. Reed, D. A., & Dongarra, J. (2015). Exascale computing and big data. Communications of the ACM, 58(7), 56–68. · DOI
  31. Reinhart, C., & Rogoff, K. (2010). Growth in a time of debt. American Economic Review, 2, 573–578. · DOI · Paper page
  32. Roberts, S., & Winters, J. (2013). Linguistic diversity and traffic accidents: Lessons from statistical studies of cultural traits. PLoS ONE, 8(8), e70902. · DOI
  33. Schutt, R., & O’Neil, C. (2014). Doing data science. Newton, MA: O’Reilly Media.
  34. Shen, A. (2015). Around Kolmogorov complexity: Basic notions and results. http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/journals/corr/Shen15 · DOI
  35. Smith, G. (2014). Standard deviations: Flawed assumptions, tortured data, and other ways to lie with statistics. New York: Overlook/Duckworth.
  36. Stanton, J. M. (2012). Introduction to data science. Syracuse: Syracuse University.
  37. Thomas Herndon, M. A., & Pollin, R. (2014). Does high public debt consistently stifle economic growth? A critique of Reinhart and Rogoff. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 38, 257–279. · DOI
  38. Vereshchagin, N. K. (2007). Kolmogorov complexity of enumerating finite sets. Information Processing Letters, 103(1), 34–39. · DOI
  39. Vigen, T. (2015). Spurious correlations. New York: Hachette Books.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Calude, C. S., & Longo, G.
Affiliations
  • University of Auckland (NZ)
  • Tufts University (US)
Corresponding author
Longo, Giuseppe
Venue
Foundations of Science
Published
2016-03-07
Volume
22
Issue
3
Pages
595-612
ISSN
  • 1233-1821 (ISSN-L)
  • 1572-8471
OpenAlex
W2299251378
Cited by
385
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 61 · 2021: 56 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 46 · 2018: 44 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 11
FWCI
35.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Foundations of Science (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • ResearchSpace (University of Auckland) (submittedVersion)
Funders
FP7 People: Marie-Curie Actions
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computability, Logic, AI Algorithms
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Big Data Technologies and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy of Biology and Scientific Explanation
Keywords
spurious correlations, big data, large databases, data mining, scientific method, end of science, ergodic theory, Ramsey theory, algorithmic information theory

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