↓ Skip to main content

The Newcomb-Benford Law in Its Relation to Some Common Distributions

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, May 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Newcomb-Benford Law in Its Relation to Some Common Distributions
Published in
PLOS ONE, May 2010
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0010541
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anton K. Formann

Abstract

An often reported, but nevertheless persistently striking observation, formalized as the Newcomb-Benford law (NBL), is that the frequencies with which the leading digits of numbers occur in a large variety of data are far away from being uniform. Most spectacular seems to be the fact that in many data the leading digit 1 occurs in nearly one third of all cases. Explanations for this uneven distribution of the leading digits were, among others, scale- and base-invariance. Little attention, however, found the interrelation between the distribution of the significant digits and the distribution of the observed variable. It is shown here by simulation that long right-tailed distributions of a random variable are compatible with the NBL, and that for distributions of the ratio of two random variables the fit generally improves. Distributions not putting most mass on small values of the random variable (e.g. symmetric distributions) fail to fit. Hence, the validity of the NBL needs the predominance of small values and, when thinking of real-world data, a majority of small entities. Analyses of data on stock prices, the areas and numbers of inhabitants of countries, and the starting page numbers of papers from a bibliography sustain this conclusion. In all, these findings may help to understand the mechanisms behind the NBL and the conditions needed for its validity. That this law is not only of scientific interest per se, but that, in addition, it has also substantial implications can be seen from those fields where it was suggested to be put into practice. These fields reach from the detection of irregularities in data (e.g. economic fraud) to optimizing the architecture of computers regarding number representation, storage, and round-off errors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Luxembourg 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 64 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 15%
Student > Master 9 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Researcher 5 8%
Other 15 23%
Unknown 15 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 11 17%
Computer Science 9 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 9%
Engineering 5 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 5%
Other 13 20%
Unknown 19 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 March 2024.
All research outputs
#7,439,850
of 26,032,395 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#105,066
of 227,337 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,087
of 105,881 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#331
of 722 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,032,395 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 227,337 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 105,881 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 722 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.