andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2010 andrew_gelman_stats-2010-220 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: There is sometimes a line of news, a thought or an article sufficiently aligned with the general topics on this blog that is worth sharing. I could have emailed it to a few friends who are interested. Or I could have gone through the relative hassle of opening up the blog administration interface, cleaned it up a little, added some thoughts and made it pretty to post on the blog. And then it’s poring through hundreds of spam messages, just to find two or three false positives in a thousand spams. Or, finding the links, ideas and comments reproduced on another blog without attribution or credit. Or, even, finding the whole blog mirrored on another website. It might seem all work and no fun, but what keeps me coming back is your comments: the discussions, the additional links, information and insights you provide, this is what makes it all worthwhile. Thanks, those of you who are commenters! And let us know what would make your life easier.
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 There is sometimes a line of news, a thought or an article sufficiently aligned with the general topics on this blog that is worth sharing. [sent-1, score-0.961]
2 I could have emailed it to a few friends who are interested. [sent-2, score-0.354]
3 Or I could have gone through the relative hassle of opening up the blog administration interface, cleaned it up a little, added some thoughts and made it pretty to post on the blog. [sent-3, score-1.445]
4 And then it’s poring through hundreds of spam messages, just to find two or three false positives in a thousand spams. [sent-4, score-0.831]
5 Or, finding the links, ideas and comments reproduced on another blog without attribution or credit. [sent-5, score-1.146]
6 Or, even, finding the whole blog mirrored on another website. [sent-6, score-0.636]
7 It might seem all work and no fun, but what keeps me coming back is your comments: the discussions, the additional links, information and insights you provide, this is what makes it all worthwhile. [sent-7, score-0.623]
8 And let us know what would make your life easier. [sent-9, score-0.164]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('links', 0.222), ('finding', 0.216), ('blog', 0.215), ('hassle', 0.205), ('reproduced', 0.2), ('positives', 0.195), ('sufficiently', 0.191), ('aligned', 0.187), ('cleaned', 0.184), ('interface', 0.184), ('opening', 0.171), ('attribution', 0.165), ('emailed', 0.164), ('spam', 0.157), ('messages', 0.156), ('comments', 0.154), ('administration', 0.153), ('thousand', 0.152), ('keeps', 0.147), ('insights', 0.143), ('hundreds', 0.137), ('thanks', 0.133), ('gone', 0.125), ('friends', 0.12), ('easier', 0.119), ('relative', 0.117), ('another', 0.116), ('additional', 0.115), ('commenters', 0.114), ('discussions', 0.114), ('topics', 0.112), ('false', 0.112), ('added', 0.111), ('fun', 0.105), ('provide', 0.098), ('life', 0.096), ('thoughts', 0.094), ('coming', 0.09), ('worth', 0.089), ('whole', 0.089), ('line', 0.088), ('news', 0.086), ('ideas', 0.08), ('sometimes', 0.079), ('three', 0.078), ('little', 0.071), ('could', 0.07), ('let', 0.068), ('back', 0.064), ('information', 0.064)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 1.0 220 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-20-Why I blog?
Introduction: There is sometimes a line of news, a thought or an article sufficiently aligned with the general topics on this blog that is worth sharing. I could have emailed it to a few friends who are interested. Or I could have gone through the relative hassle of opening up the blog administration interface, cleaned it up a little, added some thoughts and made it pretty to post on the blog. And then it’s poring through hundreds of spam messages, just to find two or three false positives in a thousand spams. Or, finding the links, ideas and comments reproduced on another blog without attribution or credit. Or, even, finding the whole blog mirrored on another website. It might seem all work and no fun, but what keeps me coming back is your comments: the discussions, the additional links, information and insights you provide, this is what makes it all worthwhile. Thanks, those of you who are commenters! And let us know what would make your life easier.
2 0.14848728 619 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-19-If a comment is flagged as spam, it will disappear forever
Introduction: A commenter wrote (by email): I’ve noticed that you’ve quit approving my comments on your blog. I hope I didn’t anger you in some way or write something you felt was inappropriate. My reply: I have not been unapproving any comments. If you have comments that have not appeared, they have probably been going into the spam filter. I get literally thousands of spam comments a day and so anything that hits the spam filter is gone forever. I think there is a way to register as a commenter; that could help.
3 0.12653241 771 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-16-30 days of statistics
Introduction: I was talking with a colleague about one of our research projects and said that I would write something up, if blogging didn’t get in the way. She suggested that for the next month I just blog about my research ideas. So I think I’ll do that. This means no mocking of plagiarists, no reflections on literature, no answers to miscellaneous questions about how many groups you need in a multilevel model, no rants about economists, no links to pretty graphs, etc., for 30 days. Meanwhile, I have a roughly 30-day backlog. So after my next 30 days of stat blogging, the backlog will gradually appear. There’s some good stuff there, including reflections on Milos, a (sincere) tribute to the haters, an updated Twitteo Killed the Bloggio Star, a question about acupuncture, and some remote statistical modeling advice I gave that actually worked! I’m sure you’ll enjoy it. But you’ll have to wait for all that fun stuff. For the next thirty days, it’s statistics research every day. P.S. I
4 0.1254798 523 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-18-Spam is out of control
Introduction: I just took a look at the spam folder . . . 600 messages in the past hour ! Seems pretty ridiculous to me.
5 0.1202144 817 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-23-New blog home
Introduction: Hi all. We’ve moved the blog and are still working out some bugs. For example, we delete spam comments but sometimes they remain on the blog. A few other things. We should be cleaning it up more in the next few days.
6 0.11681616 425 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-21-If your comment didn’t get through . . .
7 0.11052723 41 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-19-Updated R code and data for ARM
8 0.10697123 1488 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-08-Annals of spam
9 0.10661851 2232 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-03-What is the appropriate time scale for blogging—the day or the week?
10 0.1060231 132 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-07-Note to “Cigarettes”
11 0.10517093 2075 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-23-PubMed Commons: A system for commenting on articles in PubMed
12 0.098028474 1871 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-27-Annals of spam
13 0.097659282 27 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-11-Update on the spam email study
14 0.09716133 966 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-20-A qualified but incomplete thanks to Gregg Easterbrook’s editor at Reuters
15 0.09392111 1854 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-13-A Structural Comparison of Conspicuous Consumption in China and the United States
16 0.093481362 856 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-16-Our new improved blog! Thanks to Cord Blomquist
17 0.092285395 1240 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-02-Blogads update
18 0.087941468 2253 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-17-On deck this week: Revisitings
19 0.086427569 1202 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-08-Between and within-Krugman correlation
20 0.083036937 1832 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-29-The blogroll
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.145), (1, -0.071), (2, -0.049), (3, 0.016), (4, 0.019), (5, -0.026), (6, 0.059), (7, -0.061), (8, 0.031), (9, -0.035), (10, -0.003), (11, 0.026), (12, 0.089), (13, 0.041), (14, -0.04), (15, 0.086), (16, -0.039), (17, -0.038), (18, -0.058), (19, 0.071), (20, 0.088), (21, -0.007), (22, -0.072), (23, -0.038), (24, 0.021), (25, 0.002), (26, 0.035), (27, 0.062), (28, -0.008), (29, -0.021), (30, -0.017), (31, 0.025), (32, 0.004), (33, -0.012), (34, -0.003), (35, 0.057), (36, 0.034), (37, 0.021), (38, 0.018), (39, -0.019), (40, -0.085), (41, 0.019), (42, 0.026), (43, 0.004), (44, -0.045), (45, -0.032), (46, 0.024), (47, -0.017), (48, -0.017), (49, -0.058)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.96621358 220 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-20-Why I blog?
Introduction: There is sometimes a line of news, a thought or an article sufficiently aligned with the general topics on this blog that is worth sharing. I could have emailed it to a few friends who are interested. Or I could have gone through the relative hassle of opening up the blog administration interface, cleaned it up a little, added some thoughts and made it pretty to post on the blog. And then it’s poring through hundreds of spam messages, just to find two or three false positives in a thousand spams. Or, finding the links, ideas and comments reproduced on another blog without attribution or credit. Or, even, finding the whole blog mirrored on another website. It might seem all work and no fun, but what keeps me coming back is your comments: the discussions, the additional links, information and insights you provide, this is what makes it all worthwhile. Thanks, those of you who are commenters! And let us know what would make your life easier.
2 0.91712683 1709 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-06-The fractal nature of scientific revolutions
Introduction: Phil Earnhardt writes: I stumbled across your blog entry after googling on those terms. If I could comment on the closed entry [We had to shut off comments on old blog entries for reasons of spam --- ed.], I’d note: scientific revolutions are fractal; they’re also chaotic in their dynamics. Predictability when a particular scientific revolution will take hold—or be rejected—is problematic. I find myself wishing that Chaos Theory had been established when Kuhn wrote his essay.
3 0.86419004 817 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-23-New blog home
Introduction: Hi all. We’ve moved the blog and are still working out some bugs. For example, we delete spam comments but sometimes they remain on the blog. A few other things. We should be cleaning it up more in the next few days.
4 0.80410951 771 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-16-30 days of statistics
Introduction: I was talking with a colleague about one of our research projects and said that I would write something up, if blogging didn’t get in the way. She suggested that for the next month I just blog about my research ideas. So I think I’ll do that. This means no mocking of plagiarists, no reflections on literature, no answers to miscellaneous questions about how many groups you need in a multilevel model, no rants about economists, no links to pretty graphs, etc., for 30 days. Meanwhile, I have a roughly 30-day backlog. So after my next 30 days of stat blogging, the backlog will gradually appear. There’s some good stuff there, including reflections on Milos, a (sincere) tribute to the haters, an updated Twitteo Killed the Bloggio Star, a question about acupuncture, and some remote statistical modeling advice I gave that actually worked! I’m sure you’ll enjoy it. But you’ll have to wait for all that fun stuff. For the next thirty days, it’s statistics research every day. P.S. I
5 0.79068977 619 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-19-If a comment is flagged as spam, it will disappear forever
Introduction: A commenter wrote (by email): I’ve noticed that you’ve quit approving my comments on your blog. I hope I didn’t anger you in some way or write something you felt was inappropriate. My reply: I have not been unapproving any comments. If you have comments that have not appeared, they have probably been going into the spam filter. I get literally thousands of spam comments a day and so anything that hits the spam filter is gone forever. I think there is a way to register as a commenter; that could help.
6 0.77855802 1488 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-08-Annals of spam
7 0.77425772 132 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-07-Note to “Cigarettes”
8 0.77164865 790 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-08-Blog in motion
9 0.76010382 856 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-16-Our new improved blog! Thanks to Cord Blomquist
10 0.75781685 2075 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-23-PubMed Commons: A system for commenting on articles in PubMed
11 0.73890984 1202 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-08-Between and within-Krugman correlation
12 0.73725909 9 andrew gelman stats-2010-04-28-But it all goes to pay for gas, car insurance, and tolls on the turnpike
13 0.73315346 104 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-22-Seeking balance
14 0.7171663 1168 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-14-The tabloids strike again
15 0.70685941 839 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-04-To commenters who are trying to sell something
16 0.70402682 1964 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-01-Non-topical blogging
17 0.70133466 2088 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-04-Recently in the sister blog
18 0.69851148 91 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-16-RSS mess
19 0.69629955 1065 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-17-Read this blog on Google Currents
20 0.69318819 2085 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-02-I’ve already written next year’s April Fools post!
topicId topicWeight
[(2, 0.037), (8, 0.128), (16, 0.072), (21, 0.078), (24, 0.126), (34, 0.017), (45, 0.026), (57, 0.021), (98, 0.038), (99, 0.343)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
1 0.9669891 916 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-18-Multimodality in hierarchical models
Introduction: Jim Hodges posted a note to the Bugs mailing list that I thought could be of more general interest: Is multi-modality a common experience? I [Hodges] think the answer is “nobody knows in any generality”. Here are some examples of bimodality that certainly do *not* involve the kind of labeling problems that arise in mixture models. The only systematic study of multimodality I know of is Liu J, Hodges JS (2003). Posterior bimodality in the balanced one-way random effects model. J.~Royal Stat.~Soc., Ser.~B, 65:247-255. The surprise of this paper is that in the simplest possible hierarchical model (analyzed using the standard inverse-gamma priors for the two variances), bimodality occurs quite readily, although it is much less common to have two modes that are big enough so that you’d actually get a noticeable fraction of MCMC draws from both of them. Because the restricted likelihood (= the marginal posterior for the two variances, if you’ve put flat priors on them) is
same-blog 2 0.96584612 220 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-20-Why I blog?
Introduction: There is sometimes a line of news, a thought or an article sufficiently aligned with the general topics on this blog that is worth sharing. I could have emailed it to a few friends who are interested. Or I could have gone through the relative hassle of opening up the blog administration interface, cleaned it up a little, added some thoughts and made it pretty to post on the blog. And then it’s poring through hundreds of spam messages, just to find two or three false positives in a thousand spams. Or, finding the links, ideas and comments reproduced on another blog without attribution or credit. Or, even, finding the whole blog mirrored on another website. It might seem all work and no fun, but what keeps me coming back is your comments: the discussions, the additional links, information and insights you provide, this is what makes it all worthwhile. Thanks, those of you who are commenters! And let us know what would make your life easier.
3 0.95963216 1378 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-13-Economists . . .
Introduction: Catherine Rampell writes : On Monday the Nobel Foundation, which bestows the world’s most prestigious academic, literary and humanitarian prizes, said it was reducing the cash awarded with Nobel Prizes by about 20 percent. . . . Peter A. Diamond, a professor emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who also received the Nobel in economic science in 2010, observed that over the long run, cutting the cash award could dilute the prize’s prestige. But he added that Monday’s news overstates the financial blow to future laureates. “One of the things that comes with the prize, besides the prestige and the money,” he said, “is the opportunities to make more money.” I wouldn’t think these guys need the money, but I suppose it’s part of their professional code that they have to say that? (Recall our earlier discussion of the economist who said he’d stop working once his marginal tax rate reached the anticipated value of 93%.)
4 0.95847291 575 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-15-What are the trickiest models to fit?
Introduction: John Salvatier writes: What do you and your readers think are the trickiest models to fit? If I had an algorithm that I claimed could fit many models with little fuss, what kinds of models would really impress you? I am interested in testing different MCMC sampling methods to evaluate their performance and I want to stretch the bounds of their abilities. I don’t know what’s the trickiest, but just about anything I work on in a serious way gives me some troubles. This reminds me that we should finish our Bayesian Benchmarks paper already.
5 0.95811236 1128 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-19-Sharon Begley: Worse than Stephen Jay Gould?
Introduction: Commenter Tggp links to a criticism of science journalist Sharon Begley by science journalist Matthew Hutson. I learned of this dispute after reporting that Begley had received the American Statistical Association’s Excellence in Statistical Reporting Award, a completely undeserved honor, if Hutson is to believed. The two journalists have somewhat similar profiles: Begley was science editor at Newsweek (she’s now at Reuters) and author of “Train Your Mind, Change Your Brain: How a New Science Reveals Our Extraordinary Potential to Transform Ourselves,” and Hutson was news editor at Psychology Today and wrote the similarly self-helpy-titled, “The 7 Laws of Magical Thinking: How Irrational Beliefs Keep Us Happy, Healthy, and Sane.” Hutson writes : Psychological Science recently published a fascinating new study on jealousy. I was interested to read Newsweek’s 1300-word article covering the research by their science editor, Sharon Begley. But part-way through the article, I
7 0.94734108 317 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-04-Rob Kass on statistical pragmatism, and my reactions
8 0.94630831 1056 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-13-Drawing to Learn in Science
9 0.93440288 662 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-15-Bayesian statistical pragmatism
10 0.93327355 478 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-20-More on why “all politics is local” is an outdated slogan
11 0.93212956 147 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-15-Quote of the day: statisticians and defaults
12 0.93192488 789 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-07-Descriptive statistics, causal inference, and story time
14 0.92904574 1989 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-20-Correcting for multiple comparisons in a Bayesian regression model
15 0.92883503 1824 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-25-Fascinating graphs from facebook data
16 0.92876738 2234 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-05-Plagiarism, Arizona style
17 0.92848599 486 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-26-Age and happiness: The pattern isn’t as clear as you might think
18 0.92772895 246 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-31-Somewhat Bayesian multilevel modeling