andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2010 andrew_gelman_stats-2010-476 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: Word count stats from the Google books database prove that Bayesianism is expanding faster than the universe. A n-gram is a tuple of n words.
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 Word count stats from the Google books database prove that Bayesianism is expanding faster than the universe. [sent-1, score-2.189]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('expanding', 0.401), ('bayesianism', 0.376), ('database', 0.358), ('faster', 0.32), ('prove', 0.318), ('stats', 0.299), ('count', 0.287), ('word', 0.238), ('google', 0.234), ('books', 0.206), ('words', 0.199)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.99999994 476 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-19-Google’s word count statistics viewer
Introduction: Word count stats from the Google books database prove that Bayesianism is expanding faster than the universe. A n-gram is a tuple of n words.
2 0.16849473 318 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-04-U-Haul statistics
Introduction: Very freakonomic (and I mean that in the best sense of the word).
3 0.16822989 2138 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-18-In Memoriam Dennis Lindley
Introduction: So. Farewell then Dennis Lindley. You held the Hard line on Bayesianism When others Had doubts. And you share The name of a famous Paradox. What is your subjective Prior now? We can only Infer. R. A. Thribb (17 1/2) P.S.
4 0.16120338 77 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-09-Sof[t]
Introduction: Joe Fruehwald writes: I’m working with linguistic data, specifically binomial hits and misses of a certain variable for certain words (specifically whether or not the “t” sound was pronounced at the end of words like “soft”). Word frequency follows a power law, with most words appearing just once, and with some words being hyperfrequent. I’m not interested in specific word effects, but I am interested in the effect of word frequency. A logistic model fit is going to be heavily influenced by the effect of the hyperfrequent words which constitute only one type. To control for the item effect, I would fit a multilevel model with a random intercept by word, but like I said, most of the words appear only once. Is there a principled approach to this problem? My response: It’s ok to fit a multilevel model even if most groups only have one observation each. You’ll want to throw in some word-level predictors too. Think of the multilevel model not as a substitute for the usual thoug
5 0.1285882 911 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-15-More data tools worth using from Google
Introduction: Speaking of open data and google tools, see this post from Revolution R: How to use a Google Spreadsheet as data in R .
6 0.11482868 1191 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-01-Hoe noem je?
7 0.10076135 620 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-19-Online James?
8 0.10073608 574 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-14-“The best data visualizations should stand on their own”? I don’t think so.
9 0.098833688 207 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-14-Pourquoi Google search est devenu plus raisonnable?
10 0.085910901 1190 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-29-Why “Why”?
11 0.085224599 2228 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-28-Combining two of my interests
12 0.084826618 1294 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-01-Modeling y = a + b + c
14 0.081743635 1292 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-01-Colorless green facts asserted resolutely
15 0.080139369 1980 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-13-Test scores and grades predict job performance (but maybe not at Google)
16 0.079937428 1559 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-02-The blog is back
17 0.077829689 1296 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-03-Google Translate for code, and an R help-list bot
18 0.07249479 499 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-03-5 books
19 0.072094545 802 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-13-Super Sam Fuld Needs Your Help (with Foul Ball stats)
20 0.068502277 1582 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-18-How to teach methods we don’t like?
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.033), (1, -0.006), (2, -0.02), (3, 0.024), (4, 0.018), (5, 0.011), (6, 0.021), (7, -0.005), (8, 0.019), (9, -0.009), (10, -0.005), (11, -0.017), (12, 0.017), (13, -0.015), (14, 0.01), (15, 0.012), (16, 0.023), (17, -0.01), (18, 0.02), (19, -0.029), (20, -0.011), (21, -0.001), (22, 0.016), (23, 0.012), (24, -0.01), (25, -0.003), (26, 0.017), (27, 0.013), (28, -0.014), (29, -0.01), (30, -0.021), (31, -0.015), (32, 0.002), (33, 0.009), (34, -0.014), (35, 0.05), (36, 0.017), (37, -0.021), (38, 0.015), (39, -0.01), (40, 0.046), (41, -0.02), (42, 0.041), (43, 0.057), (44, -0.014), (45, 0.016), (46, 0.021), (47, -0.004), (48, -0.011), (49, -0.046)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.9929651 476 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-19-Google’s word count statistics viewer
Introduction: Word count stats from the Google books database prove that Bayesianism is expanding faster than the universe. A n-gram is a tuple of n words.
2 0.69499755 620 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-19-Online James?
Introduction: Eric Tassone writes: I [Tassone] had to Google “ Mary Rosh ” but remember that imbroglio now. Made my day, too. But really I wanted to write to ask you about something related to Bill James. I first encountered his works at age 13, when a baseball coach talked up his books and lent me one (that I fear I never returned). I then read his Abstracts from ’84 or ’85 until they went away, and then some of his other books in the ’90s. Anyway, my question is: Do you know if these works are available on a CD or DVD-ROM or the web something, like they do sometimes w/ collections like Mad Magazine or the New Yorker cartoons or whatever? Maybe through his website, to which I do not subscribe? (By the way, Google Books produces search results for the ’83-’87 editions, but at most just little clippings, not the full book or anything.) I wonder why we don’t see more of this, since the marginal cost of re-packaging and distributing already-created content for which there is at least some pent
3 0.59257996 1559 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-02-The blog is back
Introduction: We had some security problem: not an actual virus or anything, but a potential leak which caused Google to blacklist us. Cord fixed us and now we’re fine. Good job, Google! Better to find the potential problem before there is any harm!
4 0.54738289 927 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-26-R and Google Visualization
Introduction: Eric Tassone writes: Here’s something that may be of interest and useful to your readers, and which I [Tassone] am just now checking out myself. It links R and the Google Visualization API/Google Chart Tools to make Motion Charts (as used in the well known Hans Rosling TED talk) easier to create directly in R. The website is here , and here ‘s a blog about how to use it, including some R code that actually works (if the user has all the requisite libraries, of course) in your own browser.
5 0.54551697 2054 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-07-Bing is preferred to Google by people who aren’t like me
Introduction: This one is fun because I have a double conflict of interest: I’ve been paid (at different times) both by Google and by Microsoft. Here’s the story: Microsoft, September 2012 : An independent research company, Answers Research based in San Diego, CA, conducted a study using a representative online sample of nearly 1000 people, ages 18 and older from across the US. The participants were chosen from a random survey panel and were required to have used a major search engine in the past month. Participants were not aware that Microsoft was involved. In the test, participants were shown the main web search results pane of both Bing and Google for 10 search queries of their choice. Bing and Google search results were shown side-by-side on one page for easy comparison – with all branding removed from both search engines. The test did not include ads or content in other parts of the page such as Bing’s Snapshot and Social Search panes and Google’s Knowledge Graph. For each search,
6 0.5312798 1637 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-24-Textbook for data visualization?
7 0.52700055 911 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-15-More data tools worth using from Google
8 0.51002294 1436 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-31-A book on presenting numbers from spreadsheets
9 0.50954539 509 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-09-Chartjunk, but in a good cause!
10 0.50898695 1980 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-13-Test scores and grades predict job performance (but maybe not at Google)
11 0.50261492 1179 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-21-“Readability” as freedom from the actual sensation of reading
12 0.49546123 207 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-14-Pourquoi Google search est devenu plus raisonnable?
13 0.4872427 499 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-03-5 books
14 0.48245224 1871 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-27-Annals of spam
15 0.47905606 505 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-05-Wacky interview questions: An exploration into the nature of evidence on the internet
16 0.46745601 581 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-19-“The best living writer of thrillers”
17 0.46541888 1984 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-16-BDA at 40% off!
18 0.46344703 986 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-01-MacKay update: where 12 comes from
19 0.46305764 517 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-14-Bayes in China update
20 0.46133453 2213 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-16-There’s no need for you to read this one
topicId topicWeight
[(24, 0.105), (68, 0.073), (91, 0.469), (99, 0.126)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
1 0.93369478 1537 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-17-100!
Introduction: Behavioral and Brain Sciences
same-blog 2 0.90912634 476 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-19-Google’s word count statistics viewer
Introduction: Word count stats from the Google books database prove that Bayesianism is expanding faster than the universe. A n-gram is a tuple of n words.
3 0.76668406 1106 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-08-Intro to splines—with cool graphs
Introduction: Ido Rosen pointed me to this page by Mike Kamermans.
4 0.61431837 637 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-29-Unfinished business
Introduction: This blog by J. Robert Lennon on abandoned novels made me think of the more general topic of abandoned projects. I seem to recall George V. Higgins writing that he’d written and discarded 14 novels or so before publishing The Friends of Eddie Coyle. I haven’t abandoned any novels but I’ve abandoned lots of research projects (and also have started various projects that there’s no way I’ll finish). If you think about the decisions involved, it really has to be that way. You learn while you’re working on a project whether it’s worth continuing. Sometimes I’ve put in the hard work and pushed a project to completion, published the article, and then I think . . . what was the point? The modal number of citations of our articles is zero, etc.
5 0.60751593 1186 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-27-Confusion from illusory precision
Introduction: When I posted this link to Dean Foster’s rants, some commenters pointed out this linked claim by famed statistician/provacateur Bjorn Lomberg: If [writes Lomborg] you reduce your child’s intake of fruits and vegetables by just 0.03 grams a day (that’s the equivalent of half a grain of rice) when you opt for more expensive organic produce, the total risk of cancer goes up, not down. Omit buying just one apple every 20 years because you have gone organic, and your child is worse off. Let’s unpack Lomborg’s claim. I don’t know anything about the science of pesticides and cancer, but can he really be so sure that the effects are so small as to be comparable to the health effects of eating “just one apple every 20 years”? I can’t believe you could estimate effects to anything like that precision. I can’t believe anyone has such a precise estimate of the health effects of pesticides, and also I can’t believe anyone has such a precise effect of the health effect of eating an app
6 0.58374524 920 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-22-Top 10 blog obsessions
7 0.5804078 2138 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-18-In Memoriam Dennis Lindley
8 0.55234212 1528 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-10-My talk at MIT on Thurs 11 Oct
9 0.51651353 53 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-26-Tumors, on the left, or on the right?
10 0.4829362 736 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-29-Response to “Why Tables Are Really Much Better Than Graphs”
11 0.48158637 1753 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-06-Stan 1.2.0 and RStan 1.2.0
12 0.46862143 686 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-29-What are the open problems in Bayesian statistics??
14 0.38947627 1365 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-04-Question 25 of my final exam for Design and Analysis of Sample Surveys
15 0.38825354 2209 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-13-CmdStan, RStan, PyStan v2.2.0
16 0.38260347 2296 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-19-Index or indicator variables
17 0.3819865 48 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-23-The bane of many causes
18 0.37599888 1475 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-30-A Stan is Born
19 0.36489844 1660 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-08-Bayesian, Permutable Symmetries
20 0.3624123 1362 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-03-Question 24 of my final exam for Design and Analysis of Sample Surveys