Question: did the decay of collective attention on English Wikipedia change from 2015 to 2025 for a fixed kind of stimulus? Earlier SCI studies found slower, not faster, attention in daily top lists and linked this to one-day spikes, but they could not tell if these spikes are automated traffic or human bursts. Data: Wikimedia daily top-1000 lists (user agent) for all-access (4,127 days) and mobile-web (4,122 days), 2015-07-01 to 2026-10-21, and Wikidata dates of death. Method: we selected new spikes that reach the article top 50 and are at least 8 times the rank-1000 cutoff on all days from 7 days before to 30 days after the peak. Thus all values at or above 1/8 of the peak are exact. We measured the peak-day share of spike views, the next-day ratio, the days until views fall below 1/8 of the peak, and the fraction of one-day spikes. Death spikes have a Wikidata date of death 0 to 2 days before the peak. Intervals come from 2,000 bootstrap samples of calendar months. Results: in 1,496 all-access death spikes, the peak share changed from 0.582 (2015-2017) to 0.569 (2023-2025), a difference of -0.013 (95% CI -0.032 to +0.006). The days to 1/8 of the peak changed by -0.08 (CI -0.28 to +0.13). The result held for lag 0, lag 0-1 and two size groups. In mobile-web data, death spikes became slightly broader (peak share -0.039, CI -0.058 to -0.021). In all 15,900 all-access spikes, the peak share decreased from 0.719 to 0.563, and the fraction of one-day spikes decreased from 0.354 to 0.093. This change in the mix of spikes explains 72% of the decrease (66% in mobile-web data). In 2015-2016, 29-30% of one-day spikes got less than 10% of peak-day views from the mobile web, against 6% of other spikes. In 2026 this fraction increased again to 31%, mostly on obscure pages. Conclusion: we found no acceleration of attention decay, also for a stimulus class with a fixed cause. The large aggregate slowdown is mostly a loss of one-day, often desktop-only spikes. Limitations: English Wikipedia only, daily resolution, large spikes only, values below 1/8 of the peak not seen, and the user traffic class changed in 2020. We did not test causes.
Filters: arxiv: cs.CY (Computers and Society) ×
We checked the hourly and daily UCI Bike Sharing files for 2011–2012. All 731 daily weather codes equal the mean of the observed hourly codes, rounded to the nearest integer with halves rounded up. This match does not prove the provider's processing method. Hourly codes 3 and 4 mark broad precipitation classes. At least one such hour occurs on 300 dates, but only 21 dates have daily code 3. Daily code 1 includes 87 dates with such hours. Daily code 3 covers 22.4% of all recorded precipitation-class hours. The distinction persists on the 655 dates with all 24 hour labels. We give exact bounds for each daily code and a 731-row table that keeps hourly class counts and observed denominators. Raw rental-count ratios differ between weather definitions because they compare different date groups. They are not causal effects. A separate parser and a full repeat confirm the results. The package preserves source data, hashes, code, figures and repeat instructions.
We tested whether recorded daily weather improves estimates of the casual share of Capital Bikeshare rentals in a later year. We fitted fixed ridge models on all 365 dates in 2011 and tested all 366 dates in 2012. The calendar model used month, weekday, holiday, and day group terms. Other models added temperature, humidity, wind, and weather class. Each date had equal weight. Adding all weather terms changed mean absolute error from 3.574 to 3.371 percentage points. The paired change was -0.203 points. Its 95% block interval was -0.746 to +0.443 points when both years were resampled and models were fitted again. The all-weather model did not clearly beat the temperature model either: +0.005 points, interval -0.367 to +0.485. Its error fell on weekends and holidays but rose slightly on working days. Its mean positive bias grew from 0.604 to 1.587 points. All planned model checks kept small negative error changes relative to calendar, with fixed-fit intervals that included zero. A model with other weather terms but no temperature had a smaller point error than the all-weather model. These results do not show that weather has no useful information. They describe this daily outcome, model family, and year split. The test uses recorded weather and does not identify a causal effect or a forecast before weather is known. The package preserves source data, provenance, the local plan, figures, all daily predictions, bootstrap draws, checks, and repeat instructions.
We tested whether old name popularity improves ten-year forecasts beyond the previous 40 years. We used pinned US Social Security applicant name records and matching totals from babynames 1.0.1. The main test had 34,951 name, recorded sex, and forecast start cases, with at least 100 applicants at forecast start. Forecast start years were 1997–2007. Each ridge model used only training outcomes and inputs known by its start year. Adding a popularity input from 80–84 years earlier reduced mean squared log-share error from 0.52504 to 0.52231, or 0.52%. A 95% name-cluster resampling interval was -0.35% to 1.40%. It held the 11 tested target years fixed. The reduction was -1.10% when the threshold was 50 applicants and 1.53% when it was 200. Inputs from 40–44 and 60–64 years earlier gave reductions of 0.34% and 0.60%. The tested 80-year input thus added little mean forecast value, with no clear advantage over the other history windows. These reconstructed forecasts use a later source snapshot. They do not identify family memory or exclude other revival processes. The package preserves source files, code, all predictions, validation scores, fitted parameters, resampling draws, figures, and reproduction instructions.
Question: after a death, does attention to the English Wikipedia article stay above the level expected if the person were alive? We sampled at random 2,000 of 60,678 Wikidata humans with an English article, at least 3 sitelinks and a day-precision death date from July 2016 to June 2024, and 1,500 of 653,384 living people born 1925-1999. We downloaded daily user pageviews from July 2015 to September 2026. For 1,026 deaths with at least 1 view per day in the year before death, we matched 5 controls in the same calendar windows on occupation group, gender, birth year and the level and trend of pre-death views. We used three control designs: living people, and people who died more than 365 or 90 days after the outcome window. The outcome is the change in log10 mean views from days -365 to -31 to a later window, minus the same change for the controls. Results: the median premium was about 16 to 18 times in days 0-29 and +17% to +19% in days 30-364. In days 380-730 it was +1.5% (95% CI -0.7% to +4.0%), -0.6% (-4.6% to +2.7%) and -1.0% (-4.2% to +2.2%) in the three designs, and only 49% to 52% of people had a positive premium. Pre-death popularity did not change the premium. Age at death did: -0.043 to -0.047 log10 units per 10 years (about -10% per decade; all CIs exclude zero), from +30% to +44% before age 60 to -4% to -7% at 80 or older. Placebo runs with pseudo-dates gave no age gradient and small biases (-2.3% to -0.6%). A power-law-plus-offset fit to weeks 1-52 gave a lasting offset of +11% to +14%, because the excess still decreased after one year. Thus plateau fits to the first year overstate the long-term premium. This is an independent replication of an earlier SCI study with a larger sample. It agrees on the null mean year-2 effect and on the age gradient. Limits: only current titles are counted, living status comes from missing Wikidata death dates, the bootstrap ignores control reuse, and the samples are moderate because of API rate limits.
We tested how event rules change repeat-purchase labels in UCI Online Retail II. The main cohort had 3,565 customers. Their first observed positive invoices were from March 2010 through September 2011. All customers had 90 full later calendar dates of follow-up. By the end of the 30th later date, 601 customers had a positive invoice on a later date. Counting later same-day positive invoices and cancellation records gave 1,154 positive labels. The rates were 16.86% and 32.37%. The difference was 15.51 percentage points. The descriptive 95% paired customer bootstrap range was 14.36 to 16.69 points. Of the 553 changed labels, 422 had cancellation evidence only, 92 had same-day purchase evidence only, and 39 had both. The difference was 14.61 points in the UK-only check and 15.03 points with a longer initial observation period. A separate XML parser checked every document. A separate SQLite implementation checked all 100,868 label rows across seven cases and four horizons. A full replay reproduced ten numerical and data files byte for byte. Broader rules must give at least as many labels. This study measures the size and source of that change in one record. Positive invoices do not prove completed purchases. The initial observation period does not prove that customers are new. The study does not identify customer intent or a causal effect. The package contains source data, provenance, code, labels, results, figures, and repeat instructions.
Question: how did question and answer activity change across the Stack Exchange network after the release of ChatGPT (30 November 2022), and where was the decrease largest? Approach: we extracted all main sites (not Stack Overflow) from seven public data dumps (2021-12 to 2026-09). A single dump does not contain deleted posts, and we found that many young questions are deleted after approximately one year (median survival 0.905 for 2023 questions from the 2023 to the 2025 dump; 0.83 in technology sites). Thus, we measured each year in its own year-end dump, so that all years have the same age and deletion exposure. Results for 126 old, active sites: the median site had 0.33 times its 2022 question count in 2025 (log change -1.11, 95% CI -1.21 to -1.04), and approximately 0.13 times in January-August 2026. Technology sites decreased more than other sites (adjusted log difference -0.52, CI -0.74 to -0.30; 2021-2022 placebo +0.01). Sites with more code in their questions decreased more, but this relation was not resolved inside the technology category, and code and non-code questions in the same site decreased equally. The share of questions answered within 7 days did not change (-0.004, CI -0.030 to +0.007), but time to first answer increased from 3.7 to 5.7 hours. Answerers decreased less than questions. A single-dump analysis gives a false decrease in answer coverage. Limitations: observational design; other 2023-2025 events (policy changes, moderation, search changes) can contribute; Stack Overflow itself is only compared descriptively.
Lorenz-Spreen et al. (2019) found that collective attention rises and falls faster over time in several media, but not on English Wikipedia in 2012-2017. We tested whether this acceleration appeared on Wikipedia in 2016-2025. We used Wikimedia Pageviews API data (agent = user): daily top-1000 lists for English (all-access, desktop, mobile web, mobile app), German, French and Japanese, and 121-day view series around 20,000 sampled top-50 peaks (English 800 per year, other languages 400 per year). In English, daily top-50 turnover with persistent articles removed decreased from 0.551 in 2016 to 0.463 in 2025 (slope -0.0101 per year, 95% CI -0.0135 to -0.0068 with years as units), on all access methods. In English mobile-web peaks, the median relative fall on the day after the peak decreased from 2.46 (2016-2017) to 1.70 (2024-2025), the share of peaks that lost half of their excess views in one day decreased from 0.752 to 0.652, and the share of excess views after the peak increased. Most of the English change occurred in 2016-2021; it is present within 2016-2019, before the April 2020 change in bot classification, and slopes in 2021-2025 are near zero. French turnover and peak falls slowed slightly, German turnover slowed slightly with no clear change in peak shape, and Japanese did not change. No tested language or English access method showed acceleration. Limits: daily UTC resolution, top-50 items only, four languages, possible residual automated traffic, and no causal test.
Lorenz-Spreen et al. (2019) found that collective attention rises and falls faster over time in several media, but not on English Wikipedia in 2012-2017. We tested whether this acceleration appeared on Wikipedia in 2016-2025. We used Wikimedia Pageviews API data (agent = user): daily top-1000 lists for English (all-access, desktop, mobile web, mobile app), German, French and Japanese, and 121-day view series around 20,000 sampled top-50 peaks (English 800 per year, other languages 400 per year). In English, daily top-50 turnover with persistent articles removed decreased from 0.551 in 2016 to 0.463 in 2025 (slope -0.0101 per year, 95% CI -0.0135 to -0.0068 with years as units), on all access methods. In English mobile-web peaks, the median relative fall on the day after the peak decreased from 2.46 (2016-2017) to 1.70 (2024-2025), the share of peaks that lost half of their excess views in one day decreased from 0.752 to 0.652, and the share of excess views after the peak increased. Most of the English change occurred in 2016-2021; it is present within 2016-2019, before the April 2020 change in bot classification, and slopes in 2021-2025 are near zero. French turnover and peak falls slowed slightly, German turnover slowed slightly with no clear change in peak shape, and Japanese did not change. No tested language or English access method showed acceleration. Limits: daily UTC resolution, top-50 items only, four languages, possible residual automated traffic, and no causal test.
Question: does death increase long-term attention to a person's English Wikipedia article? Prior studies compare views after death with the same person's views before death. We compared each person with matched controls in the same calendar windows. Data: a 6% hash sample (7,488) of all 123,455 Wikidata humans with an English article who died from August 2016 to September 2026, 23,925 living controls stratified by birth decade, and daily user pageviews from July 2015 to September 2026. Treated: 1,276 people who died 2016–2024 with a day-precision date and at least 5 views per day in days −395 to −31. Each had 5 controls (living or not yet dead), matched exactly on gender and on birth year within 2 years, and by nearest neighbour on the level and trend of pre-death views. Results: relative to controls, the excess views decayed and reached about zero 16 months after death. The mean year-2 (days 365–729) effect on log(mean views+1) was +0.018 (95% CI −0.011 to 0.047). Years 3–8 were also near zero. Three placebo runs with pseudo-dates for living people gave −0.016 to −0.032, so effects below about ±0.05 are not interpretable. Age at death set the sign: +0.467 (0.318 to 0.623) before age 60, +0.100 at 60–74, +0.010 at 75–84, and −0.115 (−0.150 to −0.080) at 85 or older. Placebo runs showed no age gradient. The gradient held with living-only or later-death-only controls, 10 controls, other calipers and thresholds, and step filters. It also held in an adjusted regression (−0.011 per year of age), which also gave a large effect of unnatural death (+0.70). People with 15 or more language editions had a +0.133 year-2 effect. Limits: we counted views only for the current title, the bootstrap ignores control reuse, living status comes from missing Wikidata death dates, and only articles with pre-death traffic were analysed.
Question: Did collective attention on Wikipedia become faster after 2017? Lorenz-Spreen et al. (2019) found faster attention dynamics in Twitter and other media, but not clearly in English Wikipedia for 2012–2017. Approach: We downloaded the Wikimedia daily lists of the 1000 most-viewed pages (user agent) for English, German and French Wikipedia, all-access and mobile-web, 2015-07-01 to 2026-10-21 (4123–4131 days for each list). We removed non-article pages and ranked the articles again. For each calendar year from 2016 to 2025 and for list sizes 10, 50, 100 and 500, we calculated daily churn, the mean days in the list for each distinct article (the Lorenz-Spreen turnover measure), one-day stays, and the shape of peaks. A third list variant kept only the all-access articles that were also in the mobile-web list on the same day. This variant is a control for automated desktop traffic. Results: English top-50 churn decreased from 0.447 to 0.390 (2016–17 to 2024–25; Theil–Sen slope −1.95%/year, 95% interval −3.10 to −1.41). Top-10 to top-100 churn decreased by 8–14% in all three English variants, and the share of one-day stays decreased by 9–19%. German and French top-10 to top-100 churn did not change clearly (top 50: ratios 0.95 and 0.99). Only the German and French top-500 lists turned over a little faster (+0.4 to +1.5%/year). In all 36 combinations of edition, variant and list size, the 95% lower limit of the residence slope was above −3.7%/year. Twitter top-50 residence decreased by about 13%/year from 2013 to 2016. In all three editions, views fell more slowly after top-50 peaks (next-day fall ratio 0.78 in English, 0.95–0.96 in German and French). Long-staying articles did not explain the results: churn of the slots that these articles did not hold had no significantly positive slope in 27 of 27 tests. Limits: The data have ten yearly values and contain some unidentified automated traffic. The lists show only the top 1000, so some peak measures are bounds. App views are not included. The study describes the change but does not identify its cause. The raw data, code and result tables are included or retained.
We tested a fixed withdrawal warning at the first tutor-marked assignment deadline in 22 OULAD course presentations from 2013–2014. The rule flagged a missing timely submission. The main cohort had 31,925 eligible student-course records after registration, banked-credit, and date-quality exclusions. Of 10,622 flags, 4,644 (43.72%) were for students whose recorded withdrawal date was on or before the deadline. These past events formed 69.15% of apparent true positives for final withdrawal. Excluding past withdrawals reduced precision from 63.23% to 34.66%, a change of −28.57 percentage points. The nominal 95% student-cluster bootstrap range for this change was −29.48 to −27.73 points. Among active students, later withdrawal was still more common with a flag than with a timely submission: 34.66% versus 13.99%. Changes to the cutoff day, grace period, assessment type, and treatment of undated withdrawals kept lower active-cohort precision. A separate parser checked 127,988 values, and a full repeat matched all eight analysis files. This audit measures the size of an established risk-set issue in one historical source. It does not test an intervention, a live warning system, or the models in prior papers. The package has source tables, code, provenance, figures, all output, and repeat instructions.