Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 2,475

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A Theory for Record Linkage

Fellegi, Ivan P., Sunter, Alan B.·1969·Journal of the American Statistical Association

Abstract

A mathematical model is developed to provide a theoretical framework for a computer-oriented solution to the problem of recognizing those records in two files which represent identical persons, objects or events (said to be matched). A comparison is to be made between the recorded characteristics and values in two records (one from each file) and a decision made as to whether or not the members of the comparison-pair represent the same person or event, or whether there is insufficient evidence to justify either of these decisions at stipulated levels of error. These three decisions are referred to as link (A 1), a non-link (A 3), and a possible link (A 2). The first two decisions are called positive dispositions. The two types of error are defined as the error of the decision A 1 when the members of the comparison pair are in fact unmatched, and the error of the decision A 3 when the members of the comparison pair are, in fact matched. The probabilities of these errors are defined as and respectively where u(γ), m(γ) are the probabilities of realizing γ (a comparison vector whose components are the coded agreements and disagreements on each characteristic) for unmatched and matched record pairs respectively. The summation is over the whole comparison space r of possible realizations. A linkage rule assigns probabilities P(A 1|γ), and P(A 2|γ), and P(A 3|γ) to each possible realization of γ ε Γ. An optimal linkage rule L (μ, λ, Γ) is defined for each value of (μ, λ) as the rule that minimizes P(A 2) at those error levels. In other words, for fixed levels of error, the rule minimizes the probability of failing to make positive dispositions. A theorem describing the construction and properties of the optimal linkage rule and two corollaries to the theorem which make it a practical working tool are given.

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 · 10.1080/01621459.1969.10501049

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

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

Cited by

See all 2,475

Metadata

Authors
Fellegi, I. P., & Sunter, A. B.
Venue
Journal of the American Statistical Association
Published
1969-12
Volume
64
Issue
328
Pages
1183-1210
ISSN
  • 0162-1459 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-274X
OpenAlex
W2073471108
Cited by
2,475
References
0
FWCI
2.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: A Theory for Record Linkage. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/01621459.1969.10501049
The paper
Fellegi, I. P., & Sunter, A. B. (1969). A Theory for Record Linkage. Journal of the American Statistical Association. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1969.10501049

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.