Cited by 1,482Big Data Technologies and ApplicationsStatistical Methods and InferenceStatistical Methods and Applications

Challenges of Big Data analysis

Open access
Fan, Jianqing, Han, Fang, Liu, Han·2014·National Science Review

Abstract

Big Data bring new opportunities to modern society and challenges to data scientists. On the one hand, Big Data hold great promises for discovering subtle population patterns and heterogeneities that are not possible with small-scale data. On the other hand, the massive sample size and high dimensionality of Big Data introduce unique computational and statistical challenges, including scalability and storage bottleneck, noise accumulation, spurious correlation, incidental endogeneity and measurement errors. These challenges are distinguished and require new computational and statistical paradigm. This paper gives overviews on the salient features of Big Data and how these features impact on paradigm change on statistical and computational methods as well as computing architectures. We also provide various new perspectives on the Big Data analysis and computation. In particular, we emphasize on the viability of the sparsest solution in high-confidence set and point out that exogenous assumptions in most statistical methods for Big Data cannot be validated due to incidental endogeneity. They can lead to wrong statistical inferences and consequently wrong scientific conclusions.

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 · 10.1093/nsr/nwt032

Cites

144 of 144 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?

  • Overfitting is a key risk in machine learning, meaning a machine may learn a model that explains errors and fails to generalize beyond training data.

    “Overfitting is a key risk in this context, which means that a machine may learn a complete model that also explains the errors, consequently failing to generalize appropriately beyond its training data (Fan, Han, & Liu, 2014).”

    From Artificial Intelligence and Management: The Automation–Augmentation Paradox (2021) · cites this paper as Fan, Han, & Liu, 2014

    Section 3.2 (page unavailable) explains that using too many features accumulates noise and worsens classification of new observations, supporting the risk of poor generalization. It does not explicitly describe a machine learning a model that explains training errors, so that part of the attributed definition is not supported by our copy. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The combination of datasets in the big data age needs to cope with a number of challenges such as efficient data representation, redundancy reduction and data compression, spurious correlations, and noise accumulation.

    “In addition, the combination of datasets in the big data age needs to cope with a number of challenges listed in [20,61], for example efficient data representation, redundancy reduction and data compression, spurious correlations, and noise accumulation.”

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

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [2]Donoho David High-dimensional data analysis: The curses and blessings of dimensionality. the American Mathematical Society Conference Los Angeles, CA, United States August 7–12, 2000
  2. [11]Fan Jianqing Lv Jinchi Sure independence screening for ultrahigh dimensional feature space (with disussion). J. Roy. Statist. Soc. Ser. B 2008 70 5 849 911 PMC2709408 19603084
  3. [48]Cochrane John Asset Pricing 2001 Princeton University Press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fan, J., Han, F., & Liu, H.
Affiliations
  • Department of Operations Research and Financial Engineering, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, USA;
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • Princeton University (US)
Venue
National Science Review
Published
2014-02-05
Volume
1
Issue
2
Pages
293-314
ISSN
  • 2053-714X (ISSN-L)
  • 2095-5138
OpenAlex
W2114060717
Cited by
1,482
References
144
Citations by year
2026: 86 · 2025: 132 · 2024: 142 · 2023: 172 · 2022: 118 · 2021: 122 · 2020: 125 · 2019: 157 · 2018: 162 · 2017: 120 · 2016: 90 · 2015: 40 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 1
FWCI
165.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • National Science Review (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (R01-GM072611, 1206464, 1332109, 1116730)
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH102339)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM072611, R01GM100474)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Big Data Technologies and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Applications
Keywords
big data analytics, high-dimensional data, scalability, noise accumulation, spurious correlations, measurement error, statistical inference, computer architecture

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