We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Milk production declines as dairy cows enter late lactation, resulting in reduced milk quality and negatively impacting milk processability, such as rennet coagulation time (RCT), milk pH and ethanol stability (ES), leading to seasonality issues for milk processors. Multispecies forages, containing grass, legume and herb species, require lower N inputs and are of interest to dairy farmers. However, little is known about the effect of grazing multispecies forages on milk processability characteristics in late lactation dairy cows. Forty-five autumn-calving dairy cows in late lactation were allocated to 1 of 3 grazing forages; perennial ryegrass (PRG; Lolium perenne), perennial ryegrass and white clover (Trifolium pratense) (PRGWC), and a 6 – species multispecies forage (MULTI) containing perennial ryegrass, timothy (Phleum pratense), white clover, red clover (Trifolium repens), chicory (Cichorium intybus) and plantain (Plantago lanceolata). Cows were allocated 12 kg DM grazed forage and supplemented with a grass – silage TMR and concentrate. Forage DMI was significantly lower for cows grazing PRG. Milk yield increased when cows grazed PRGWC (18.07 kg/d) and MULTI (17.84 kg/d) compared to PRG (16.08 kg/d). Milk RCT (mins) and ES (%) were unaffected by treatment. However, offering cows PRGWC and MULTI increased the concentration of C18:2 cis – 9, 12 and C18:3 cis – 9, 12, 15 in milk compared to PRG. Compared to PRG, grazing forages containing clover and herb species improved milk yield and beneficially altered milk fatty acid profile in late lactation dairy cows without negatively impacting milk processability.
Chapter 5 gives an extended empirical example of the Benford agreement procedure for assessing the validity of social science data. The example uses country-level data collected and estimated by the Sea Around Us organization on the dollar values of reported and unreported fish landings from 2010 to 2016. We report Benford agreement analyses for the Sea Around Us data (1) by reporting status, (2) by decade, (3) for a large fishing region of 22 West African countries, and (4) foreach of the 22 individual countries in West Africa.
Chapter 4 begins with a discussion of the types and kinds of data most suitable for an analysis that uses the Benford probability distribution. Next we describe an R computer program – program Benford – designed to evaluate observed data for agreement with the Benford probability distribution; and we give an example of output from the program using a typical dataset. We then move to an overview of our workflow of Benford agreement analyses where we outline our process for assessing the validity of data using Benford agreement analyses. We end the chapter with a discussion of the concept of Benford validity, which we will employ in subsequent chapters.
Chapter 7 takes a closer look at some of the Sea Around Us fish-landings data that we assessed for Benford agreement in Chapter 5. We chose these data because of the mixed agreement findings among them: while the full dataset and several sets of subgroups indicated that the data exhibited Benford validity, when we analyzed West African countries individually, a number of them were found to have unacceptable Benford agreement and therefore problematic Benford validity. We present ways in which researchers can assess the impact of unacceptable Benford agreement on their analyses.
Chapter 3 describes and illustrates the Benford probability distribution. A brief summary of the origin and evolution of the Benford distribution is drawn and the development and assessment of various measures of goodness of fit between an empirical distribution and the Benford distribution are described and illustrated. These masures are Pearson’s chi-squared, Wilks’ likelihood-ratio, Hardy and Ramanujan’s partition theory, Fisher’s exact test, Kuiper’s measure, Tam Cho and Gaines’ d measure, Cohen’s w measure, and Nigrini’s MAD measure.
Chapter 6 provides a second empirical example of the Benford agreement procedure: here we analyze new daily COVID-19 cases at the US state level and at the global level across nations. Both the state-level and the global analyses consider time as a variable. Specifically we examine, (1) for the United States, new reports of COVID-19 between January 22, 2020 and November 16, 2021 at the state level, and (2) for the cross-national data, new reports of COVID-19 between February 24, 2020 and January 13, 2022. At the state level, we report Benford agreement analyses for (1) the full dataset, (2) cases grouped alphabetically, (3) cases grouped regionally, (4) cases grouped by days of the week, and (5) cases grouped by their governor’s party (Republican or Democratic). We then turn our Benford agreement analysis to global cross-national COVID-19 data to assess whether Benford agreement of COVID-19 varies across countries.
This chapter gives an overview of the remainder of the book. We first provide commonsense and social science examples of reliability and validity, two necessary conditions that data must posses to have trustworthy conclusions based upon it. We next introduce Benford’s law and offer a brief overview of other social science studies that have employed it to check the accuracy of their data. We then turn to an overview of our Benford agreement analysis procedure and introduce the concept of Benford validity. The chapter concludes with a plan for the remainder of the book.
Here we develop a discussion of the concept of validity in the social sciences. We first highlight the history of validity and how it has been conceptualized and measured over time. Next we discuss a type of social science data that is often overlooked in the validity measurement and assessment literature: data that are based on self-reporting. Despite the widespread use of self-reported data in various social science disciplines such as economics, political science, and sociology, there are still few reported attempts to check data accuracy. By way of giving examples, we overview self-reported data in four areas: (1) US prison population data, (2) COVID-19 case data, (3) toxic releases, and (4) fish landings. We then discuss the need for a tool and for an established workflow for assessing the accuracy and validity of quantitative self-reported data in the social sciences. We suggest that applying Benford’s law to these types of data can provide a measure of validity assessment for data that would otherwise not be assessed for accuracy; then we briefly introduce the concept of Benford validity. We conclude the chapter with a short review of existing studies that have applied Benford’s law to social science data in some manner.
Chapter 8 concludes that Benford agreement analyses are a proper process for assessing the validity of self-reported data when these data meet certain characteristics. The Benford agreement analysis workflow developed in previous chapters is summarized. Recommendations as to when researchers should use Benford agreement analyses to assess their data for Benford validity are discussed. The chapter concludes with some thoughts on the utility of Benford validity analyses in the social sciences.
Benford's Law is a probability distribution for the likelihood of the leading digit in a set of numbers. This book seeks to improve and systematize the use of Benford's Law in the social sciences to assess the validity of self-reported data. The authors first introduce a new measure of conformity to the Benford distribution that is created using permutation statistical methods and employs the concept of statistical agreement. In a switch from a typical Benford application, this book moves away from using Benford's Law to test whether the data conform to the Benford distribution, to using it to draw conclusions about the validity of the data. The concept of 'Benford validity' is developed, which indicates whether a dataset is valid based on comparisons with the Benford distribution and, in relation to this, diagnostic procedure that assesses the impact of not having Benford validity on data analysis is devised.
The redshifted cosmological 21-cm signal emitted by neutral hydrogen during the first billion years of the universe is much fainter relative to other galactic and extragalactic radio emissions, posing a great challenge towards detection of the signal. Therefore, precise instrumental calibration is a vital prerequisite for the success of radio interferometers such as the Murchison Widefield Array (MWA), which aim for a 21-cm detection. Over the previous years, novel calibration techniques targeting the power spectrum paradigm of EoR science have been actively researched and where possible implemented. Some of these improvements, for the MWA, include the accuracy of sky models used in calibration and the treatment of ionospheric effects, both of which introduce unwanted contamination to the EoR window. Despite sophisticated non-traditional calibration algorithms being continuously developed over the years to incorporate these methods, the large datasets needed for EoR measurements require high computational costs, leading to trade-offs that impede making use of these new tools to maximum benefit. Using recently acquired computation resources for the MWA, we test the full capabilities of the state-of-the-art calibration techniques available for the MWA EoR project, with a focus on both direction-dependent and direction-independent calibration. Specifically, we investigate improvements that can be made in the vital calibration stages of sky modelling, ionospheric correction, and compact source foreground subtraction as applied in the hybrid foreground mitigation approach (one that combines both foreground subtraction and avoidance). Additionally, we investigate a method of ionospheric correction using interpolated ionospheric phase screens and assess its performance in the power spectrum space. Overall, we identify a refined RTS calibration configuration that leads to an at least 2 factor reduction of the EoR window power contamination at the
$0.1 \; \textrm{hMpc}^{-1}$
scale. The improvement marks a step further towards detecting the 21-cm signal using the MWA and the forthcoming SKA low telescope.