Reference health

Simple Methods for Evaluating and Comparing Binary Experiments

CiteStamped reference-health badge
36/36 checkable references clean · checked 2026-10-18

Every reference with a DOI in the deposited reference list resolved to a known work in Crossref or DataCite at the dated check, and none carried a retraction, withdrawal, or removal notice.

7 without a DOI — not checked. A reference deposited without a DOI is never matched by title or guessed at; it stays outside the checked set, and this line discloses that.

The 36 checked references that resolve
resolves10.1016/j.rie.2017.01.001
The value of information in monotone decision problems
resolves10.1111/j.2517-6161.1949.tb00028.x
Statistical Inference
resolves10.1093/biomet/45.3-4.296
AN ESSAY TOWARDS SOLVING A PROBLEM IN THE DOCTRINE OF CHANCES
resolves10.1007/BFb0099476
Computation and Proof Theory
resolves10.2307/2985716
Classification Procedures Based on Bayes's Formula
resolves10.1214/aoms/1177705050
On the Foundations of Statistical Inference: Binary Experiments
resolves10.2307/2281640
On the Foundations of Statistical Inference
resolves10.1525/9780520411586-009
Comparison of Experiments
resolves10.1214/aoms/1177729032
Equivalent Comparisons of Experiments
resolves10.1287/deca.1040.0022
Configuration of Detection Software: A Comparison of Decision and Game Theory Approaches
resolves10.1287/mnsc.39.4.501
Aggregating Point Estimates: A Flexible Modeling Approach
resolves10.1214/aoms/1177704567
Uncertainty, Information, and Sequential Experiments
resolves10.1016/j.patrec.2005.10.010
An introduction to ROC analysis
resolves10.21236/ad0708563
UTILITY THEORY FOR DECISION MAKING
resolves10.1093/oxfordjournals.jleo.a023361
Naive, Biased, yet Bayesian: Can Juries Interpret Selectively Produced Evidence?
resolves10.1007/978-0-387-21606-5_14
Unsupervised Learning
resolves10.1080/00031305.1987.10475455
The Validity of the Likelihood Principle
resolves10.1214/aoms/1177729995
A Solution to the Problem of Optimum Classification
resolves10.2307/2982696
Can Jurors Understand Probabilistic Evidence?
resolves10.1287/deca.1040.0023
Value of Information in Portfolio Decision Analysis
resolves10.1056/NEJMoa031759
Efficacy of MRI and Mammography for Breast-Cancer Screening in Women with a Familial or Genetic Predisposition
resolves10.1016/j.jbi.2005.02.008
The use of receiver operating characteristic curves in biomedical informatics
resolves10.1080/01621459.1968.11009239
On Cash Equivalents and Information Evaluation in Decisions Under Uncertainty Part I: Basic Theory
resolves10.1016/s0140-6736(05)66481-1
Screening with magnetic resonance imaging and mammography of a UK population at high familial risk of breast cancer: a prospective multicentre cohort study (MARIBS)
resolves10.1214/aos/1176350818
Comparing Location Experiments
resolves10.1214/aoms/1177728069
On a Measure of the Information Provided by an Experiment
resolves10.1214/aoms/1177700386
The Bayesian Analysis of Contingency Tables
resolves10.1111/1468-0262.00296
Envelope Theorems for Arbitrary Choice Sets
resolves10.1287/mnsc.23.7.679
Combining Expert Judgments: A Bayesian Approach
resolves10.3949/ccjm.74.12.897
How should we screen for breast cancer? Mammography, ultrasonography, MRI.
resolves10.1098/rsta.1933.0009
IX. On the problem of the most efficient tests of statistical hypotheses
resolves10.1093/oso/9780198509844.001.0001
The Statistical Evaluation of Medical Tests for Classification and Prediction
resolves10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb00917.x
A Mathematical Theory of Communication
resolves10.1007/s10957-007-9339-1
Monotone Comparative Statics: Geometric Approach
resolves10.1214/aoms/1177732144
Contributions to the Theory of Statistical Estimation and Testing Hypotheses
resolves10.1016/j.econlet.2003.11.003
Selling less information for more: garbling with benefits
The 7 references without a DOI — listed, not checked
no DOI — not checkedref1
no DOI — not checkedReconnaissance in game theory
no DOI — not checkedReparing concavities in ROC curves
no DOI — not checkedA Bayesian exposition of Blackwell's theorem on the comparison of experiments
no DOI — not checkedref25
no DOI — not checkedA nonconcavity in the value of information
no DOI — not checkedref40
What this badge says. CiteStamped means the CHECKABLE references of this work were clean at the dated check: each resolved to a known work in a public registry, and none carried a retraction notice at that time. If Crossref’s record marks the work itself retracted, withdrawn, or removed, the badge says so instead of showing clean. It says nothing about the quality, findings, or importance of the work itself, and nothing about references deposited without a DOI.

checked 2026-10-18 — re-checked at most once a day, when someone opens this page, so the date shown is the last check; titles and statuses come from Crossref and DataCite and are not part of the signed record

Embed this badge

Both snippets point at the live badge image and link back to this page. The badge shows the date of its last check, which runs at most once a day, when someone opens this page.

<a href="https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.1025492"><img src="https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.1025492/badge.svg" alt="CiteStamped reference-health badge" width="460" height="64"></a>
[![CiteStamped reference-health badge](https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.1025492/badge.svg)](https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.1025492)