andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2010 andrew_gelman_stats-2010-233 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: Juli thought this might answer some of my questions . To me, though, it seemed a bit of a softball interview, didn’t really go into the theory that the reason she’s stopped recording is that she didn’t really write most of the material herself.
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 Juli thought this might answer some of my questions . [sent-1, score-0.479]
2 To me, though, it seemed a bit of a softball interview, didn’t really go into the theory that the reason she’s stopped recording is that she didn’t really write most of the material herself. [sent-2, score-2.421]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('juli', 0.445), ('softball', 0.445), ('recording', 0.402), ('stopped', 0.281), ('interview', 0.247), ('didn', 0.239), ('material', 0.202), ('seemed', 0.174), ('theory', 0.151), ('really', 0.15), ('questions', 0.149), ('answer', 0.141), ('reason', 0.136), ('write', 0.122), ('though', 0.115), ('thought', 0.11), ('bit', 0.108), ('go', 0.1), ('might', 0.079)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 1.0 233 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-25-Lauryn Hill update
Introduction: Juli thought this might answer some of my questions . To me, though, it seemed a bit of a softball interview, didn’t really go into the theory that the reason she’s stopped recording is that she didn’t really write most of the material herself.
Introduction: Gayle Laackmann reports ( link from Felix Salmon) that Microsoft, Google, etc. don’t actually ask brain-teasers in their job interviews. The actually ask a lot of questions about programming. (I looked here and was relieved to see that the questions aren’t very hard. I could probably get a job as an entry-level programmer if I needed to.) Laackmann writes: Let’s look at the very widely circulated “15 Google Interview Questions that will make you feel stupid” list [ here's the original list , I think, from Lewis Lin] . . . these questions are fake. Fake fake fake. How can you tell that they’re fake? Because one of them is “Why are manhole covers round?” This is an infamous Microsoft interview question that has since been so very, very banned at both companies . I find it very hard to believe that a Google interviewer asked such a question. We’ll get back to the manhole question in a bit. Lacakmann reports that she never saw any IQ tests in three years of interviewi
3 0.10060763 981 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-30-rms2
Introduction: In case you just can’t get enough, check out this amusing interview. The interview is from the year 2000 (I think) but it reads like it could’ve been done yesterday.
4 0.088544883 2032 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-20-“Six red flags for suspect work”
Introduction: Raghu Parthasarathy sends along this article by C. Glenn Begley listing six questions to ask when worried about unreplicable work in biology: Were experiments performed blinded? (Even animal studies should be blinded when it comes to the recording and interpretation of the data—do you hear that, Mark Hauser?) Were basic experiments repeated? (“If reports fail to state that experiments were repeated, be sceptical.”) Were all the results presented? (That one’s a biggie .) Were there positive and negative controls? (He offers some details from lab experiments.) Were reagents validated? (Whatever.) Were statistical tests appropriate? (I don’t like the idea of statistical “tests” at all, but I agree with his general point.)
5 0.081940532 350 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-18-Subtle statistical issues to be debated on TV.
Introduction: There is live debate that will available this week for those that might be interested. The topic: Can early stopped trials result in misleading results of systematic reviews? It’s sponsored by the Cochrane Collaboration and although the level of discussion is often not very technical, it does in my opinion provide a nice window into clinical research and as Tukey might put it “the real uncertainties involved”. (As a disclaimer – I once assigned some reading from this group to my graduate students and they were embarrassed and annoyed at the awkward handling of even minor technical issues – but the statistical research community is not their target audience.) I have a favourite in this debate, and a quick search on co-authors (not me) would likely tip that off to most members of this blog. Here’s the directions kindly supplied by Jonathan Sterne, who will be in the chair. Dear SMG Members, By means of follow up to previous advertisements; the Discussion Meeting:”Can
6 0.07332167 2175 andrew gelman stats-2014-01-18-A course in sample surveys for political science
7 0.073099166 548 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-01-What goes around . . .
8 0.072121836 1998 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-25-A new Bem theory
9 0.068779066 390 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-02-Fragment of statistical autobiography
10 0.067580663 1252 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-08-Jagdish Bhagwati’s definition of feminist sincerity
11 0.066739693 1752 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-06-Online Education and Jazz
12 0.064198866 594 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-28-Behavioral economics doesn’t seem to have much to say about marriage
14 0.063561693 297 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-27-An interesting education and statistics blog
15 0.063053802 1428 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-25-The problem with realistic advice?
16 0.061407894 1202 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-08-Between and within-Krugman correlation
17 0.060411818 1081 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-24-Statistical ethics violation
18 0.058445748 1652 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-03-“The Case for Inductive Theory Building”
19 0.057290398 1311 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-10-My final exam for Design and Analysis of Sample Surveys
20 0.056615278 883 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-01-Arrow’s theorem update
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.079), (1, -0.037), (2, -0.023), (3, 0.012), (4, 0.001), (5, 0.009), (6, 0.042), (7, 0.008), (8, 0.037), (9, -0.025), (10, 0.013), (11, 0.011), (12, 0.017), (13, -0.007), (14, -0.008), (15, -0.036), (16, -0.002), (17, -0.021), (18, 0.028), (19, 0.012), (20, -0.015), (21, -0.064), (22, 0.006), (23, 0.006), (24, -0.009), (25, 0.008), (26, 0.009), (27, -0.047), (28, -0.0), (29, -0.018), (30, 0.033), (31, -0.002), (32, 0.006), (33, -0.005), (34, -0.025), (35, -0.031), (36, 0.001), (37, 0.009), (38, -0.002), (39, -0.039), (40, -0.004), (41, 0.029), (42, 0.017), (43, 0.012), (44, -0.023), (45, -0.026), (46, 0.026), (47, 0.004), (48, -0.016), (49, -0.004)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.98095882 233 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-25-Lauryn Hill update
Introduction: Juli thought this might answer some of my questions . To me, though, it seemed a bit of a softball interview, didn’t really go into the theory that the reason she’s stopped recording is that she didn’t really write most of the material herself.
2 0.72515404 699 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-06-Another stereotype demolished
Introduction: I’ve heard from various sources that when you give a talk in an econ dept that they eat you alive: typically the audience showers you with questions and you are lucky to get past the second slide in your presentation. So far, though, I’ve given seminar talks in three economics departments–George Mason University a few years ago, Sciences Po last year, and Hunter College yesterday–and all three times the audiences have been completely normal. They did not interrupt unduly and they asked a bunch of good questions at the end. n=3, sure. But still.
Introduction: Gayle Laackmann reports ( link from Felix Salmon) that Microsoft, Google, etc. don’t actually ask brain-teasers in their job interviews. The actually ask a lot of questions about programming. (I looked here and was relieved to see that the questions aren’t very hard. I could probably get a job as an entry-level programmer if I needed to.) Laackmann writes: Let’s look at the very widely circulated “15 Google Interview Questions that will make you feel stupid” list [ here's the original list , I think, from Lewis Lin] . . . these questions are fake. Fake fake fake. How can you tell that they’re fake? Because one of them is “Why are manhole covers round?” This is an infamous Microsoft interview question that has since been so very, very banned at both companies . I find it very hard to believe that a Google interviewer asked such a question. We’ll get back to the manhole question in a bit. Lacakmann reports that she never saw any IQ tests in three years of interviewi
4 0.71024865 2323 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-07-Cause he thinks he’s so-phisticated
Introduction: This story (“Yale tells students to keep Kissinger talk secret . . . ‘Dr. Kissinger’s visit to campus will not be publicized, so we appreciate your confidentiality…’”) reminds me of two things: - In the 1980s, I once went to a public lecture at Harvard by Kissinger protogé Ted Koppel, who indeed has that deep Ted Koppel voice even when he’s just chatting (as I overheard). Koppel insisted that the contents of his talk not be reported. It was no great loss; he didn’t really have anything newsworthy to say. The talk was fine, he told us some interesting things, just nothing that would’ve made the news or even the campus newspaper. Still, it seemed kinda tacky for a reporter whose shtick was access to the powerful, to not want his own speech to be reported. - In the 1990s, a colleague of mine in a different dept told us that this professor from another university was coming by to give a lecture. I told my colleague that I’d like to meet with the guy, as I wanted to ask his opin
5 0.70703262 1307 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-07-The hare, the pineapple, and Ed Wegman
Introduction: Commenters here are occasionally bothered that I spend so much time attacking frauds and plagiarists. See, for example, here and here . Why go on and on about these losers, given that there are more important problems in the world such as war, pestilence, hunger, and graphs where the y-axis doesn’t go all the way down to zero? Part of the story is that I do research for a living so I resent people who devalue research through misattribution or fraud, in the same way that rich people don’t like counterfeiters. What really bugs me, though, is when cheaters get caught and still don’t admit it. People like Hauser, Wegman, Fischer, and Weick get under my skin because they have the chutzpah to just deny deny deny. The grainy time-stamped videotape with their hand in the cookie jar is right there, and they’ll still talk around the problem. Makes me want to scream. This happens all the time . All. Over. The. Place. Everybody makes mistakes, and just about everybody does thing
6 0.70517516 239 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-28-The mathematics of democracy
7 0.70338893 1938 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-14-Learning how to speak
8 0.69883507 438 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-30-I just skyped in from Kentucky, and boy are my arms tired
10 0.69417429 1073 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-20-Not quite getting the point
11 0.68035817 1190 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-29-Why “Why”?
13 0.66914994 1598 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-30-A graphics talk with no visuals!
14 0.66601139 2230 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-02-What is it with Americans in Olympic ski teams from tropical countries?
15 0.66548127 548 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-01-What goes around . . .
16 0.66522461 594 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-28-Behavioral economics doesn’t seem to have much to say about marriage
17 0.66204059 2300 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-21-Ticket to Baaaath
18 0.65730202 1882 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-03-The statistical properties of smart chains (and referral chains more generally)
19 0.65425378 1526 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-09-Little Data: How traditional statistical ideas remain relevant in a big-data world
20 0.65286869 532 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-23-My Wall Street Journal story
topicId topicWeight
[(15, 0.112), (24, 0.126), (87, 0.313), (99, 0.248)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
1 0.90901399 225 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-23-Getting into hot water over hot graphics
Introduction: I like what Antony Unwin has to say here (start on page 5).
Introduction: John Kastellec, Jeff Lax, and Justin Phillips write : Do senators respond to the preferences of their states’ median voters or only to the preferences of their co-partisans? We [Kastellec et al.] study responsiveness using roll call votes on ten recent Supreme Court nominations. We develop a method for estimating state-level public opinion broken down by partisanship. We find that senators respond more powerfully to their partisan base when casting such roll call votes. Indeed, when their state median voter and party median voter disagree, senators strongly favor the latter. [emphasis added] This has significant implications for the study of legislative responsiveness, the role of public opinion in shaping the personnel of the nations highest court, and the degree to which we should expect the Supreme Court to be counter-majoritarian. Our method can be applied elsewhere to estimate opinion by state and partisan group, or by many other typologies, so as to study other important qu
3 0.8751384 127 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-04-Inequality and health
Introduction: Several people asked me for my thoughts on Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett’s book, “The Spirit Level: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger.” I’ve outsourced my thinking on the topic to Lane Kenworthy .
same-blog 4 0.83843136 233 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-25-Lauryn Hill update
Introduction: Juli thought this might answer some of my questions . To me, though, it seemed a bit of a softball interview, didn’t really go into the theory that the reason she’s stopped recording is that she didn’t really write most of the material herself.
5 0.83666205 720 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-20-Baby name wizards
Introduction: The other day I noticed a car with the improbable name of Nissan Rogue, from Darien, Connecticut (at least that’s what the license plate frame said). And, after all, what could be more “rogue”-like than a suburban SUV? I can’t blame the driver of the car for this one; I’m just amused that the marketers and Nissan thought this was an appropriate name for the car.
7 0.80932242 1773 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-21-2.15
8 0.80570978 355 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-20-Andy vs. the Ideal Point Model of Voting
9 0.78016174 183 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-04-Bayesian models for simultaneous equation systems?
10 0.77195776 1868 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-23-Validation of Software for Bayesian Models Using Posterior Quantiles
11 0.76438797 918 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-21-Avoiding boundary estimates in linear mixed models
13 0.73212332 2351 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-28-Bayesian nonparametric weighted sampling inference
14 0.72932452 783 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-30-Don’t stop being a statistician once the analysis is done
15 0.71587241 1574 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-12-How to Lie With Statistics example number 12,498,122
16 0.71230149 1788 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-04-When is there “hidden structure in data” to be discovered?
18 0.70374149 2032 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-20-“Six red flags for suspect work”
19 0.70095301 583 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-21-An interesting assignment for statistical graphics
20 0.69936651 548 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-01-What goes around . . .