Priority in “discovery,” which sometimes leads to eponymy, is a highly prized form of reward in the scientific community. Recognition of priority is a norm whose violation will bring opprobrium (e.g. suspicion of plagiarism) upon the offender. But in order for an idea to receive an attribution of novelty, and its author to be acknowledged, it must first be noticed. This essay is a case study of an innovation (formulas related to stratified sampling) in the field of mathematical statistics that was “overlooked” for many years by many. Unknowingly, Jerzy Neyman (1894‐1981) “refound” these formulas a decade later (1933). When a statistician in 1950 uncovered the original idea and its author (A.A. Chuprov, 1874‐1926), he contacted Neyman who promptly published a “Recognition of priority” (1952). The study examines the perplexing situation in which some results become known to and recognized by the statistical community, while others, originating from the very same paper, were “overlooked” by sampling statisticians (among others) who, unlike Neyman, had access to the paper and thus had ample opportunity to identify Chuprov's formulas as relevant to their work. Chuprov was well‐known in the statistics world, and the publication in which he published his ideas (1923) was a respected statistical journal (Metron). How is it that it took nearly 20 years for someone in the statistics community to notice that Chuprov had anticipated Neyman in deriving the formulas in question?

中文翻译：

---

Chuprov和Neyman：科学的优先重点和科学成果的不均匀扩散

有时会引起同名的“发现”优先权是科学界一种非常珍贵的奖励形式。承认优先权是一项规范，违反该规范会给罪犯带来辱骂（例如，怀疑窃）。但是，为了使一个想法具有新颖性，并得到其作者的认可，必须首先注意它。本文是对数理统计领域的一项创新（与分层抽样有关的公式）的案例研究，这一创新已被许多人“忽视”了许多年。不知不觉中，Jerzy Neyman（1894-1981）在十年后（1933）“重新”发现了这些公式。当统计学家在1950年发现最初的想法及其作者（AA Chuprov，1874-1926年）时，他联系了内曼，后者迅速发表了《承认优先权》（1952年）。这项研究考察了令人困惑的情况，在这种情况下，一些结果已为统计界所了解并得到统计界的认可，而另一些源自同一篇论文的结果却被抽样统计学家（除其他外）“忽视”了，与内曼不同，统计学家可以使用论文，因此有充分的机会确定Chuprov的公式与他们的工作相关。Chuprov在统计领域举世闻名，他发表自己的见解（1923）的出版物是一本备受推崇的统计期刊（Metron）。统计界的某人花了将近20年的时间才注意到Chuprov曾期望Neyman得出有关公式？