The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Comparison of Alternative Tests of Significance for the Problem of $m$ Rankings
Open accessOverview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
“As for comparing the classifiers over multiple datasets, we followed the recommendations in Demˇ sar (2006) and used the Friedman test (Friedman, 1940) to reject the null hypothesis.”
From Deep learning for time series classification: a review (2019) · cites this paper as Friedman, 1940
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
The use of ranks to avoid the assumption of normality implicit in the analysis of variance
Friedman, M. (1937) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1937.10503522 · Cited by 7,005
Self-citationStatistical Tables for Biological, Agricultural and Medical Research.
Reed, L. J., Fisher, R. A., & Yates, F. (1944) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2280633 · Cited by 3,012
Kendall, M. G., & Smith, B. B. (1939) · The Annals of Mathematical Statistics · doi:10.1214/aoms/1177732186 · Cited by 992
The Correlation Ratio for Ranked Data
Wallis, W. A. (1939) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1939.10503552 · Cited by 58
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Use of Ranks in One-Criterion Variance Analysis
Kruskal, W. H., & Wallis, W. A. (1952) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1952.10483441 · Cited by 13,912
Statistical Comparisons of Classifiers over Multiple Data Sets
Demšar, J. (2006) · doi:10.5555/1248547.1248548 · Cited by 12,051
Derrac, J., García, S., Molina, D., & Herrera, F. (2011) · Swarm and Evolutionary Computation · doi:10.1016/j.swevo.2011.02.002 · Cited by 5,562
Deep learning for time series classification: a review
Ismail Fawaz, H., Forestier, G., Weber, J., Idoumghar, L., & Muller, P.-A. (2019) · Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery · doi:10.1007/s10618-019-00619-1 · Cited by 3,342
“As for comparing the classifiers over multiple datasets, we followed the recommendations in Demšar (2006) and used the Friedman test (Friedman, 1940) to reject the null hypothesis.”
MethodInfluentialGarcía, S., Fernández, A., Luengo, J., & Herrera, F. (2009) · Information Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.ins.2009.12.010 · Cited by 2,236
Metadata
- Authors
- Friedman, M.
- Corresponding author
- Friedman, Milton
- Venue
- The Annals of Mathematical Statistics
- Publisher
- Institute of Mathematical Statistics
- Published
- 1940-03
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 86-92
- ISSN
- 0003-4851 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2016944307
- Cited by
- 2,785
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 191 · 2025: 256 · 2024: 244 · 2023: 253 · 2022: 264 · 2021: 231 · 2020: 209 · 2019: 173 · 2018: 133 · 2017: 106 · 2016: 132 · 2015: 93 · 2014: 82 · 2013: 72 · 2012: 67
- FWCI
- 5.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- The Annals of Mathematical Statistics (publishedVersion)
- Project Euclid (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Probability and Statistical Research
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Game Theory and Voting Systems
- Keywords
- tests of significance, rank tests, comparison of statistical tests
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
