Cited by 19Probability and Statistical ResearchLiterary, Cultural, Historical AnalysisBayesian Modeling and Causal Inference

Why probability probably doesn’t exist (but it is useful to act like it does)

Spiegelhalter, David·2024·Nature

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/d41586-024-04096-5

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • If a virtual museum's success is measured in clicks or time spent, designers will instrumentally tweak it for those metrics, possibly at the expense of contemplative engagement.

    “If a virtual museum's success is measured in clicks or time spent, designers will instrumentally tweak it for those metrics, possibly at the expense of contemplative engagement.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Spiegelhalter, D.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Spiegelhalter, David
Venue
Nature
Published
2024-12-16
Volume
636
Issue
8043
Pages
560-563
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W4405419745
Cited by
19
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 10
FWCI
6.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Probability and Statistical Research
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Literary, Cultural, Historical Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Bayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
Keywords
philosophy of probability, foundations of statistics, probability interpretation, statistical inference

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