How to Detect Fraud Using Benford's Law

Forensic Accountant Robert A. Bonavito discusses Benford’s Law which is a technique to detect fraud especially when analyzing tax returns, general ledgers and other items that contain a large amount of numerical data
Topic Overview:
✔️ What is Benford’s Law?
✔️ Expected Data When Applying Benford's Law
✔️ Example of Benford's Law by Analyzing COVID Data
Website Mentioned:
www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-...
👉 For more information contact me below or visit our website: www.rabcpafirm.com/contact/?u...
Robert A. Bonavito, CPA
1812 Front St.
Scotch Plains, NJ 07076
908-322-7719

[@currently7886]

One Month Ago... Bruh, he drops the smoking gun a month before it happens. This man is a psychic!

[@kariolar3158]

KZbin changed the date

[@NotKewl]

Yeah it’s not like Benford’s law existed before the election or was ever used

[@currently7886]

@@NotKewl According to people on Twitter, quite a few people, Benford's law before the election was a decent tool and it had its uses to detect fraud. After the election, it is just a pipe dream of the sore losers and not reliable. Life comes at ya fast.

[@shangtsung1362]

It was expected that the dems would cheat for a long time now

[@fedcoin1602]

It was used to catch Bernie Madoff

[@Candyapplebone]

A CPA: The hero we need

[@Rabcpafirm]

Have no fear, New Jersey Forensic Accountant is here!

[@kaydens6964]

Did a math degree but got bored of it, maybe this is the motivation needed to set out a path to forensic accounting!

[@atlnlgga3844]

@@Rabcpafirm this is what he going to use in court?

[@CJ-hn6ov]

@@atlnlgga3844 probably not, but gives people the hint that something does not going well

[@DD-sw1dd]

@@Rabcpafirm I’m taking Stat analysis next semester. Just got finished with Calc 3. (Mechanical Engineering Major) I haven’t been this excited over a math class in a while. I’m gonna be pluggin ALOT of data sets into this formula using excel once I learn more about it.

[@austinbanks-wilson276]

Robert my man, get ready for a Red wave of Subs. 🙏🏾

[@PRODAt3]

Unless he gets removed for being fake news

[@currently7886]

@@PRODAt3 ARCHIVE EVERYTHING!

[@TristanAD_]

some kind of miracle... i’m not going to go out and riot if we have to live under a Biden administration but man...his gun reform policies is OUTRAGEOUS. no online gun sales, ammo sales, or gun accessory sales: gun parts (springs, screws, pins, slings, mags, etc.)...a new age identity politics...scary stuff.

[@TomGalonska]

Why? Because a bunch of Republicans falsy think they can apply Benford's Law in a place where it SHOULD NOT under any circumstance be applied? Watch this video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/m6XbYZ5no7GhbZo

[@currently7886]

@@TomGalonska OK... Looks like Trumps data is way outta wack...But Biden's is A-OK. Sounds good? So... Umm.... Why don't we look into that? Do you see a lot of Republicans saying that if there was fraud on behalf of Trump we shouldn't look into that? What I am seeing is almost universal, the Republicans want a second look at the numbers where as the Democrats, even when the numbers show that it is Trump doing the tampering, do not want to look at the numbers and are fine with the result. Frankly, it doesn't matter what party you subscribe to, these anomalies should encourage you to look further into the counts no? Not only that, but the districts that Quick Maths provided were of Chicago where is this Forensic Accountant did all of Georgia. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHOSE SIDE YOU ARE A FANGIRL FOR! THE ANOMALIES ARE THERE ON BOTH SIDES NO? THEN LOOOOOOOOK INTO IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Its not the Republicans that are having a tough time getting it this time around.

[@nomorebs-vw8op]

I don't think Biden/Harris and Dr Fauci knew about this law.

[@doombybbr]

even if they did, they would need to inject a random number of votes into every state in order to hide from it.

[@ImperiumLibertas]

@@doombybbr that's not practical when trying to add the minimum number of votes to win but enough to not trigger a recount in each state.

[@mwatkins0590]

@@doombybbr thats actually a mistake. they would have to inject numbers that aren't random, they would need to inject numbers starting with 1s at greater rates than others.

[@doombybbr]

@@mwatkins0590 Randomness can be skewed to favour certain patterns. There isn't just one "random" type. But it barely matters as someone can do a base 2,3,4,5,6,7,8 and 9 check and then you get caught intentionally avoiding benfords

[@Zaros262]

If you actually care enough about this to watch a 2 minute intro, here you go: kzbin.info/www/bejne/m6XbYZ5no7GhbZo

[@ilect1690]

To those wondering, Benfords law importantly requires values from multiple orders of magnitude inorder to be accurate (eg. 10-1000). If it happens to be that the large majority >90% happen to be in the same order of magnitude you begin to see a normal distribution

[@christopherbarile2539]

You are exactly right. Also, there is no assessment of statistical error in this analysis. I am a scientist and professor. My laboratory routinely use statistics to draw conclusions about the results of experiments. The analysis in this video is completely misleading. I stumbled upon this video, and I am deeply disturbed by the implications and the vast majority of comments. Today I made a video explaining how to properly analyze the COVID-19 data using county data which is a much larger data set. kzbin.info/www/bejne/j2SzaXRnh7doeK8 I am happy to apply similar proper analyses to other data sets if people would like to see that.

[@gregorw1296]

No, you can’t use Benford’s Law to tell whether this cdc data is manipulated. For one the dataset is much too small (only 56 data points), giving random events too much weight. You can do the same analysis for the population count of the US states and will get a similar “fraudulent” looking histogram.

[@jasonransdell7055]

Upvote if you are here because of the 2020 election “results”.

[@dylanmcgriff822]

yes and was sad to find out this law doesn't work well for election fraud detecting. see description and thesis paper showing it didn't work in the past: kzbin.info/www/bejne/rHrWdZ2Yncd0ers&authuser=0

[@reasonforge9997]

@@dylanmcgriff822 Think you may have the wrong link in your comment. The kzbin.info/www/bejne/rHrWdZ2Yncd0ers&authuser=0 link goes to a video just explaining the law and does not address how it applies to elections.

[@dylanmcgriff822]

@@reasonforge9997 Yes, read his 2020 election update in his discriptions below. He references this paper: core.ac.uk/download/pdf/206427437.pdf

[@reasonforge9997]

@@dylanmcgriff822 Update, found the paper link in video description and read it and left comment on that video. The paper was full of much rhetoric but when it finally got to a real argument it picked artificial district sizes in a simulation--which seems ridiculous if they were really interested in simulating real life. From their description of their simulation: " "Our simulations, though, consist of two types. In the first type, we simulate an election by creating 1000 districts wherein each contains the same fixed number of eligible voters. Here we run several sequences of elections where every district contains 1000 eligible voters, elections where every district contains 10,000 voters, and elections where every district contains 20,000 voters".

[@bradynmelser9549]

This helps prove voter fraud!

[@Shutupasecond]

Who's here after the 2020 us election?? Haha

[@Zaros262]

If you actually care enough about this to watch a 2 minute intro, here you go: kzbin.info/www/bejne/m6XbYZ5no7GhbZo

[@thelastengineer2315]

Me

[@GrooveisKing]

Everyone lol

[@1-CRoss]

@@thelastengineer2315 me 2....

[@davemacgyver573]

That is EXACTLY why I'm here!

[@Memetologist]

Do a video on the election using Benfords Law. Thank you.

[@dylanmcgriff822]

yes and was sad to find out this law doesn't work well for election fraud detecting. see description and thesis paper showing it didn't work in the past: kzbin.info/www/bejne/rHrWdZ2Yncd0ers&authuser=0

[@r-gart]

@@dylanmcgriff822 paid shill

[@mrjesuschrist2u]

Dylan McGriff probably edited the wikipedia page to say that too, thats why he links to a random video about the law.

[@michellemellis]

Check out his new video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/eqCpZIqJaZeqaa8

[@superdpat]

@@r-gart The guy made a vid on how Benfords law does not work for elections in 2011. He's not a paid shill. You;re just a moron

[@aaron9791]

Branford’s law is known to not work well with data sets with 500 or fewer transactions.

[@OxfordLlama92]

Exactly, seeing people in here think 50 states is enough is asinine. You might be able to do this with county level data as it should provide enough data points, but even then it might not be applicable to epidemiology and it’s a weak test! It can’t prove fraud. It can only reject the assumption that there is no fraud. Lotta armchair statisticians in the comments section Also love that his graph says Bensons Law

[@michielterlouw]

@@OxfordLlama92 This is so weird, right? The guy spends the first 5 munutes explaining Benford's Law can be used on large dataset, and then he shows an example of a tiny dataset. Anyone who has done a semester of Statistics 101 should understand that's not how it works.

[@christopherbarile2539]

Thank you for this comment! The data set is too small. Although you can use statistics on small data sets, it has to be done properly with a proper assessment of statistical error, which surely was not done here. I am a scientist and professor. My laboratory routinely use statistics to draw conclusions about the results of experiments. I stumbled upon this video, and I am deeply disturbed by the implications and the vast majority of comments. Today I made a video explaining how to properly analyze the COVID-19 data using county data which is a much larger data set. kzbin.info/www/bejne/j2SzaXRnh7doeK8 I am happy to apply similar proper analyses to other data sets if people would like to see that.

[@rev68]

I'm amazed that youtube would recommend this. The machine AI must not realize this goes against their narrative.

[@notme-ji5uo]

@Smarmy Fellow no, its not. the "maths" he's trying to use here is not apt at all for this situation. if you want, you should look up benfords law yourself and watch a vid from an actual mathematician so you understand

[@LOOKINVERTED]

@@notme-ji5uo I agree to an extent, but that's not to suggest what he's explaining and uncovered isn't applicable in this case. He didn't say the reasons why the data could be misleading, only that something merits further investigation. I understand what you're saying though, due to other unforeseen circumstances (depending on the situation and circumstances) these anomalies would alter the results making the progressive curve less uniform. As he also said, this Benford's Law is a preliminary tool to look for anomalies, perhaps he should have then delved in deeper from that point on to see what else were the actual causes.

[@suemeejim715]

From a Statistician: The sample size you're using for this data analysis is way too small. I did this myself using the coronavirus cases for every county in the United States and found that the data follows Benford's Law almost perfectly. Another condition of Benford's Law that is being violated is that you have to have a data set that spans a large number of values. In this case, you have a very high preponderance of cases that fall in the Tens of Thousands and Hundreds of Thousands. I can link the data sheet if anyone is interested.

[@gulzarkundan4470]

Honest question, If you have a randomly generated sample of numbers, would its conformity to benfords law depend on sample size? In other words does benfords law not hold for smaller sample sizes, even if the sample is truly randomised? Or would the conformity just not be as pronounced as a larger sample size?

[@jamsekun1810]

hello, can i have a link?

[@johnspence8141]

awesome

[@szefowskiszef9256]

@@gulzarkundan4470 it doesn't work for purely randomly generated numbers, that's why frauds don't follow it

[@darrenthornton2419]

Another way you know this video analysis isn't very good is that it can't figure out whether this phenomenon is called "Benford's Law" or "Benson's Law" - if you can't bother to get that right, why should anyone trust that your analysis is performed any more carefully?

[@aaronphillips402]

I bet you had no idea this video was going to blow up due to the elections.

[@jackchu5453]

The KZbin algorithm is trying to tell us something but I wonder what it could be hmmm... 🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔

[@pbx7257]

Wow I stumbled upon this. Great presentation by the way, I’m wondering, can you apply Benfords Law to the results Of the 2020 Presidential Election?

[@QuartBernstein311]

Yes, and how has this been applied to other elections in failed democratic elections?

[@Rabcpafirm]

Thanks Pb X, really glad you enjoyed the video. Yes, unfortunately, the 2020 election results will have similar issues when we apply Benford’s law.

[@d1agram4]

Trump vote totals conform rather well to Benford's law, one of the first things you'd check in trying to determine whether there was fraud. Biden's fail miserably, and, what's more, the frequencies of leading digits for him are virtually symmetric about 5: exactly what you get if these were faked by those ignorant of Benford's law, and wanting to manufacture "average" looking numbers, those that begin with 4,5, or 6

[@dylanmcgriff822]

@@d1agram4 I was sad to find out this law doesn't work well for election fraud detecting. see description and thesis paper showing it didn't work in the past: kzbin.info/www/bejne/rHrWdZ2Yncd0ers&authuser=0

[@r-gart]

@@dylanmcgriff822 shill

[@Rubzplaysbrawl]

I’ll be taking this to court

[@wemustdissent]

You should probably mention that Benford's law only applies to datasets that cross several orders of magnitude. A lot of people are being mislead by this with the election results. If, for example, all the values in the dataset are two digit numbers then Benford's law does NOT apply.

[@kurtschatteman5193]

AND only if the dataset is big enough.

[@szendrich]

I've subscribed because I want to see a video of Benford's law applied to this election.

[@dylanmcgriff822]

yes and was sad to find out this law doesn't work well for election fraud detecting. see description and thesis paper showing it didn't work in the past: kzbin.info/www/bejne/rHrWdZ2Yncd0ers&authuser=0

[@szendrich]

@@dylanmcgriff822 Don't be too sure. I don't have much of a head for Maths, although I did study the logarithmic way long, long ago ..LOL. But if I understood correctly, the boy says that the pattern is consistent and always works. Perhaps not in random situations like the front page of a newspaper, but if you listen to the full video, he explains why it DOES work for every fraud situation. I could be wrong in my understanding, because this bright young man did garble my brain with the complex mathematics, but I think Benford's Law will work if applied to this election situation, if only to see if fraud has actually occurred (I think it has!). In fact, I saw somewhere in this comment section, that this fellow has already been engaged by several parties concerning the US presidential election. Keeping fingers crossed that they will find what they need to find so that democracy will prevail!!

[@JC-gb2en]

It has been applied, but the videos showing it are being censored by youtube...I WONDER WHY is the question every journalist on the planet earth should be asking right now!

[@sblbb929]

pbs.twimg.com/media/EmLFD_7UYAAvvzJ?format=jpg B_den's vote results violate Benford's Law

[@szendrich]

@@sblbb929 Wow! Thanks for that. These graphs prove that Biden is the only one that violates Benford's Law. All the rest are more or less following the pattern. And that's just in Chicago. This proves that, YES, the Benford principle does indeed work even for elections. Thank you so much!

[@alexdanailov6241]

Now that's some very good short example, quite helpful for getting a quick, basic grasp of how the law gets applied on practical level. You just earned another sub sir!

[@thenefariousnerd7910]

To everyone asking for a thorough Benford’s Law analysis of the Chicago precinct election results, the mathematician Matt Parker did a thorough look on his KZbin channel Stand-up Maths. The long and short of it is that Benford’s Law is not suitable for all data sets. Specifically, it’s a good indicator only for datasets that span multiple orders of magnitude. Consider a dataset that follows a normal (bell curve) distribution. If, for example, all of these data are one-digit numbers, then the Benford’s Law graph would be equivalent to a histogram of the data; it would look like a bell curve, which doesn’t match Benford’s Law. This doesn’t mean the data is fraudulent, it just means that it doesn’t cover a wide enough range for Benford’s Law to be applicable. A real-world example of this would be the distribution of adult heights in inches- all of the data will be two-digit numbers, so plotting all of the first digits is the same as just grouping all of the data into 10-inch bins. Legitimate data, doesn’t follow Benford’s Law. The issue with the Chicago precincts is twofold: first, 98% of the precincts had vote totals between 100 and 1000 (average of 516, stdev of 173) and second, Biden was the favorite in the majority of the precincts. This means that the vast majority of Biden vote totals were three-digit numbers, while about 30% of Trump vote totals were three-digit numbers with 70% as two- or one-digit numbers. This means that, like in the example above, the Biden graph of the data is essentially a histogram with a bin size of 100, which we would reasonably expect to follow a normal distribution, which we see. Meanwhile the Trump data significantly covers three orders of magnitude, making it a suitable dataset for Benford’s Law.

[@saylorj6810]

Sir, I would like to thank you so very much for laying this out and doing so much good for our republic. God bless!

[@kurtschatteman5193]

By misleading? Only 56 datapoints? He is a fraud.

[@TK_Trickster]

that awkward moment when bidens election results break this law, and only in the swing states lol

[@mengyuanxian3279]

Are you sure it's only in the swing states? Has anybody ever checked the election results in CA and NY against the Benford law?

[@SBBurzmali]

@@mengyuanxian3279 Nah, they just watched one video one the results from the Detroit area and became instant experts. Next they'll prove the USPS is fraud because zip codes don't follow Benford's law.

[@chadbitcoin5085]

@@SBBurzmali How's that CNN internship coming along ? I see your already falling in line ... you'll do just fine

[@SBBurzmali]

@@chadbitcoin5085 lol, have you woven CNN into this conspiracy to steal the election or that just the go to attack these days?

[@connfeebruh9439]

@@SBBurzmali Even without benford's law theres been several witness accounts from postal workers and poll workers directly corelating to some of the fradulent/compromised votes we see

[@rickswineberg]

I did a presentation of Benford's Law in my fraud class in the Masters of Accounting Degree. I would do an overlay of the presented number against the Benford's distribution.

[@misbahb123]

can you tell me about fake data entry i mean how can we know the data is fake or authentic? for example if someone has 150 responses and duplicate the data and make some changes in it and make it 300 is there any way we can find out that the data of 150 responses is fake or not?

[@maxtabmann6701]

Accountants using math and never heared about statistical standard deviations. Whenever someone say "Its very complicated, it really means, he did not understand the thing"

[@deadpool10001]

Mr. Bonavito, please do a video on this election in relations to Benford's Law.

[@dylanmcgriff822]

yes and was sad to find out this law doesn't work well for election fraud detecting. see description and thesis paper showing it didn't work in the past: kzbin.info/www/bejne/rHrWdZ2Yncd0ers&authuser=0

[@tgreen5278]

@@dylanmcgriff822 American used it to detect fraud in the 2009 Iranian election

[@doombybbr]

@@dylanmcgriff822 No, it actually works As the only detraction is that certain areas tend a little bit towards certain leading digits, but not enough that a benfords law with a large data set would fail to follow the general trend. It is only a distinction that matters if you are looking at very minor deviations from benfords law, it doesn't apply to massive deviations. You just get the curve being a little steeper or a little less steep, the general curve still exists. Not to mention, every other location in this election follows the trend. And the only ones that don't just happen to be for biden in the massive swing states.

[@pranoychow3808]

@@dylanmcgriff822 Benford law still applies. It's just not as steep. It's not supposed to have such massive deviations as Biden's does.

[@juliaj7939]

This is amazing!

[@SamanthaJaneJames]

This is brilliant! Thanks for sharing Benford's Law. It can be applied so many places.

[@kurtschatteman5193]

But keep in mind Benford's law only applies to big datasets (not 56 points LOL) and orders of magnitude.

[@Folco1694]

I can't thank you enough for this video. It was so instructive and clarifying, and easy to understand, and it took just a few minutes. I'll share this video on every opportunity I get. Again, thank you very much.

[@derrickanderson5407]

I got banned from twitter for 12 hours for sharing a tweet about Benford's Law

[@mattc9009]

Come to gab.

[@willdbeast1523]

Does the example with phone numbers in a phone book work? I thought they used specific numbers for specific things which would throw it off Edit: also how many data points do you typically need before you see this technique as being significant? Obviously if you have millions of values it should be good, but is the example with 56 enough to make a judgement or would you typically need a lot more in a real world example?

[@christseinheute]

Very interesting! Never heard of Benford's Law before.

[@laurenceegerton890]

Most interesting! I barely remembered any of this from college. Very good presentation too.

[@loveoutdoorsstuckindoors8837]

Apply this law to each county & state electoral return's and publish the results. It will be very interesting to see how each state is different It's already been proven in Chicago.

[@DavidRothLovesTech]

A practical example of how to apply Benford's Law! Great job!

[@Brolintube]

Unfortunately not - there are major flaws in this application (e.g. it is based on just 50 numbers whereas Benford's law would need much larger datasets across several orders of magnitude to have any chance of the dataset conforming to the pattern shown in Benford's law. Check this video out for a much more insightful analysis on Benford's law. kzbin.info/www/bejne/m6XbYZ5no7GhbZo

[@gouthaman.gopalan]

Good presentation. One last step to statistically decide if the number set conserves to Benford' s law is doing Chi Square test

[@navyfan87]

Great easy to understand video. And no surprise that different states are reporting cases in different ways, not to mention the inaccuracy of the tests. One common mistake is to assume the underlying data for each data set member is incorrect when in fact, the results here only show the randomness or lack thereof for the data set as presented. This example illustrates that quite well.

[@matthewalexander1943]

A good video, but I gotta say that Covid data looked like it conformed pretty well with Benford's Law. There are only a few dozen data points, which is not many when you have nine slots to fill with data. Obviously, 1 is going to be the number that starts to take shape first as you add data and produce the Benford graph. 2 will be the second quickest slot to take it's proper shape. In this data, 1 occurs most frequently and 2 is already in the 2 spot. The rest of the graph deviates, but not wildly, and there are limited data points. I think the Covid data follows the rule decently well.

[@mrfloppy1952]

Can you do a data sheet with the US election 2020? That would be interesting.

[@jesswilson6012]

github.com/cjph8914/2020_benfords

[@magustrigger9195]

@@jesswilson6012 thanks dude, interesting

[@jorgen315]

Excellent presentation and choice of data!

[@mwarnken1234]

very interesting! thank you

[@El.presidente]

Like uncle Joe said "follow the science."

[@JayJay-gq8tj]

Hi Robert, thanks for sharing this information. Probably gonna sound like a broken record here in the comment section but I am too here due to the 2020 election.

[@davidjackson7675]

WOW! I was wondering about this very question.

[@loszhor]

Thanks YT Recommendations!~

[@rowbxt6044]

ive noticed that the number 6 is usually the number that is second highest on the chart when benfords laws doesn't work on the data. why is that?

[@rowbxt6044]

or doesn't show true benfords law curve. sorry not sure if that make sense.

[@Rabcpafirm]

If the number 6 has the second-highest frequency, then it probably means that the data is not random or the sample size is not large enough. When our analysis comes up with the number 6 as the second-highest frequency, it’s usually telling us that the data is manipulated and probably fraudulent. Thanks for the observation Robert

[@rowbxt6044]

@@Rabcpafirm awesome thanks for the reply

[@dylanmcgriff822]

I was sad to find out the Benford's Law doesn't work well for election fraud detecting. see description and thesis paper showing it didn't work in the past: kzbin.info/www/bejne/rHrWdZ2Yncd0ers&authuser=0 core.ac.uk/download/pdf/206427437.pdf

[@Kalle38]

running befords law on a data set of

[@sarah21968]

Thanks very informative

[@bradmiller5279]

My man you are about to get a lot of views once people start hearing about Benford’s Law

[@ghlscitel6714]

Benford's law is not a law, likewise Moore's law and Murphy's law are laws neither. They are all rules which strongly depend on the boundary conditions. So this article is a big failure.

[@dougradcliffe1466]

Please save Trump!

[@Rabcpafirm]

Have no fear, New Jersey Forensic Accountant is here!

[@sclifford9818]

This is a very fascinating subject

[@Rabcpafirm]

cool

[@jeskaaable]

Where in your Excel sheet did you use the "log" portion of the law ?

[@johnjackson9767]

Regardless of political affiliation, the possibility of fraud in a free and fair society should disgust and concern *everyone*. Unless we want to become a third world nation, this must be taken seriously and thoroughly investigated. Thank you for such a fantastic explanation and analysis.

[@elidangerfieldofficial]

Election results

[@olp852]

Interesting stuff thank you

[@krustythecarhauler]

Wow that’s pretty cool thank you

[@komnishura]

Your dataset is very small.

[@youdeserveabundance254]

LOL We are all really here for the election "results"

[@dabigbaby7193]

this is some useful information. thank you sir !!

[@grippercrapper]

The right man at the right place at the right time

[@mosesolsonmd4063]

It should be renamed to Biden's Law

[@SkylerBaird]

"Biden's Law"

[@XDarksoulX1129]

I mean. Here we are a month later. This man gave us the clear guide we need.

[@synthwavesmatter8466]

Good timing on this video.

[@tag_of_frank]

In covid example there are only 50 data points, why would the law hold when only so few data points? If you do a hypothesis test will that variance be significant given only 50 points?

[@MrZork33]

Thank you kind sir

[@davidjackson7675]

Would you consider doing a benford's law video for New York's COVID-19 data?

[@wuyajian322]

The database you used for the example looks too small, 7 days' data seems to be small of sample size to be accurate. I heard it should be over something like 2000 to be more accurate, is that true?

[@ProTinkerToys]

Great breakdown!

[@jreads2879]

Oh my god this is a mind blowing video

[@Bob-jm8kl]

I never thought I'd say accounting was fun, but anything forensic is interesting.

[@naomihouminer1445]

What happens when you cheack Benfords law on the 2019 flew season database?

[@michaelwilliams459]

We need to spread this as far as we can. I learned of Benford's Law from Louder with Crowder. Hopefully the President can learn of this fraud detection technique.

[@JC-gb2en]

Dont worry, the guy who made this video actually commented a few days ago he was contacted to help with the investigations.

[@Vladviking]

Very interesting! I'm not a numbers guy but I'll have to subscribe and try to absorb some of this.

[@baconsnot]

How does the size of the data set affect the fit of that logarithmic curve? Simple chance must be involved for small data sets. After all, a Data set of one value will have a 100% spike on one digit. Is there a rule for how many numbers a data set must have before you rely on this method?

[@keithhanson5808]

Distribution is the key . Like chicago . The way the make up is heavy blue districs go all at once it will spike numbers am I right ?

[@wywywy7436]

Thanks for your effort！Data cannot lie！

[@AllSwartzOfAdventure]

Such a cool video with a practical application. Thanks for demonstrating this and even using the Covid data. Now I’ll try to mimic your results in excel. -N

[@richtea615]

Well this was timely.

[@Poopaduke112]

2020 election!! I subbed, hoping to see this channel talk about 2020.

[@drtonys.6963]

Thank you

[@yoyohop]

So the premise of Benford's Law is that the frequency of the numbers 1-9 are not evenly distributed in large data sets? Is this due to rules of rounding?

[@villiamaxtelius1170]

"The logorithms are way out of wack". Im getting that tattooed

[@Rabcpafirm]

Hilarious

[@maburwanejohannes4647]

If the data does not follow an exponential growth does the law still work?

[@ZidaneSteiner]

I hope you can show the irregularities.

[@albertalikesbix]

Doesn't the size of the data set matter? Is there proof that a data set of only 50 items is large enough?

[@tiagoreiser4158]

I really suck at math but Im curious if this law would work in a situation like this: If I want to inflate the number of covid deaths, but instead of creating fake numbers out of the blue, I report cases of influenza as covid, so I'm adding two natural occurrences that separated would fit the law right? Would this tempering with the data be caught by the analysis using the law?

[@marksurtel9954]

Can you please show an example of a actual data set that has no fraud and the graph stating that?

[@sirmarisa]

What is the minimum data point to apply Benford's law. I'm an engineer and looking to apply this at work

[@blueblood723]

I'm an insurance investigator; great content!

[@Rabcpafirm]

Thanks Jason

[@theman3923]

I’m not sure if I understand this properly but how can you use Benford’s law on a raw data and determine some sort of manipulation in numbers if the numbers are not supposed to go in sequence and don’t have causal or correlative relationship with eachother? (Maybe it’s just a stupid question because I don’t fully understand how it works on this particular example).

[@bustabusts]

this is great man this is probably going to go viral I'm posting a link

[@kirneh666]

Very interesting. Why is it that the numbers are distributed in this way? Is there’s a short answer to that question?

[@adamthompson9785]

Whelp, this video became extremely relevant...

[@jnauttube]

Is there any case where numbers were legitimate, or more accurately, fraud was not found where the histogram did not look like the model random distribution?

[@thuglifebear5256]

Little did he know when he made this video, he would be hailed as a hero by Americans across the country.

[@maytag9006]

Can Benfords Law be used when one party voted by person and the other side was voted later by mail?

[@teejay6063]

It just hit me. I understand it now.

[@Rabcpafirm]

Nice

[@EternalDeath14]

Hmm... Really makes me think!

[@eandjroch]

Yes! I fair portion of my job includes plotting and interpreting data sets in excel. Very cool, and I am not surprised in the least that hospitals would over report covid data since they are given money for every positively identified covid patient in the hospital system. I also work for a clinic, so I take special interest in these things. The money is supposed to go to helping the hosptials take care of covid positive patients, but if you report extra, that means some extra cash to help support other needs of the hospital. I wouldn't be surprised this is what is going. It was a very poor system with too much incentive for fraud, and not enough measures in place to combat that.

[@Brolintube]

Unfortunately, this forensic accountant has applied Benford's law in a majorly flawed way in this video. Benford's law applies in 'large' datasets in certain situations. Here it is applied to a small dataset which is one reason it has minimal chance of getting close to the Benford's law pattern. It certainly is not proof that data has been manipulated.Check this video for a more accurate description of Benford's law kzbin.info/www/bejne/m6XbYZ5no7GhbZo