Paper detail

Rules of Thumb for Information Acquisition from Large and Redundant Data

We develop an abstract model of information acquisition from redundant data. We assume a random sampling process from data which provide information with bias and are interested in the fraction of information we expect to learn as function of (i) the sampled fraction (recall) and (ii) varying bias of information (redundancy distributions). We develop two rules of thumb with varying robustness. We first show that, when information bias follows a Zipf distribution, the 80-20 rule or Pareto principle does surprisingly not hold, and we rather expect to learn less than 40% of the information when randomly sampling 20% of the overall data. We then analytically prove that for large data sets, randomized sampling from power-law distributions leads to "truncated distributions" with the same power-law exponent. This second rule is very robust and also holds for distributions that deviate substantially from a strict power law. We further give one particular family of powerlaw functions that remain completely invariant under sampling. Finally, we validate our model with two large Web data sets: link distributions to domains and tag distributions on delicious.com.

preprint2010arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.