The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Comparison of Experiments
Abstract
1. Summary Bohnenblust, Shapley, and Sherman [2] have introduced a method of comparing two sampling procedures or experiments; essentially their concept is that one experiment a is more informative than a second experiment ,, a v ,S, if, for every possible risk function, any risk attainable with , is also attainable with a. If a is a sufficient statistic for a procedure equivalent to ,S, a >,, it is shown that a v j3. In the case of dichotomies, the converse is proved. Whether > and v are equivalent in general is not known. Various properties of > and n are obtained, such as the following: if a > , and y is independent of both, then the combination (a, -y) > (#, y). An application to a problem in 2 X 2 tables is discussed.
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.
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.
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
(1967) · Cited by 23,719
Strategic Manipulation of Internet Opinion Forums: Implications for Consumers and Firms
Dellarocas, C. (2006) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.1060.0567 · Cited by 773
Kiefer, J. C. (1992) · Springer Series in Statistics · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-0919-5_28 · Cited by 654
The Comparison and Evaluation of Forecasters
DeGroot, M. H., & Fienberg, S. E. (1983) · The Statistician · doi:10.2307/2987588 · Cited by 604
The Limits of Price Discrimination
Bergemann, D., Brooks, B., & Morris, S. (2015) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.20130848 · Cited by 362
Metadata
- Authors
- Blackwell, D.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Second Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability
- Publisher
- University of California Press
- Published
- 1951-12-31
- Pages
- 93-102
- OpenAlex
- W1666623353
- Cited by
- 1,024
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- conference paper
- 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: Comparison of Experiments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1525/9780520411586-009
- The paper
- Blackwell, D. (1951). Comparison of Experiments. Proceedings of the Second Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability. https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520411586-009
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.
