andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2011 andrew_gelman_stats-2011-548 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: A few weeks ago I delivered a 10-minute talk on statistical graphics that went so well, it was the best-received talk I’ve ever given. The crowd was raucous. Then some poor sap had to go on after me. He started by saying that my talk was a hard act to follow. And, indeed, the audience politely listened but did not really get involved in his presentation. Boy did I feel smug. More recently I gave a talk on Stan, at an entirely different venue. And this time the story was the exact opposite. Jim Demmel spoke first and gave a wonderful talk on optimization for linear algebra (it was an applied math conference). Then I followed, and I never really grabbed the crowd. My talk was not a disaster but it didn’t really work. This was particularly frustrating because I’m really excited about Stan and this was a group of researchers I wouldn’t usually have a chance to reach. It was the plenary session at the conference. Anyway, now I know how that guy felt from last month. My talk
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 A few weeks ago I delivered a 10-minute talk on statistical graphics that went so well, it was the best-received talk I’ve ever given. [sent-1, score-1.377]
2 He started by saying that my talk was a hard act to follow. [sent-4, score-0.656]
3 And, indeed, the audience politely listened but did not really get involved in his presentation. [sent-5, score-0.664]
4 More recently I gave a talk on Stan, at an entirely different venue. [sent-7, score-0.732]
5 Jim Demmel spoke first and gave a wonderful talk on optimization for linear algebra (it was an applied math conference). [sent-9, score-1.328]
6 Then I followed, and I never really grabbed the crowd. [sent-10, score-0.288]
7 My talk was not a disaster but it didn’t really work. [sent-11, score-0.751]
8 This was particularly frustrating because I’m really excited about Stan and this was a group of researchers I wouldn’t usually have a chance to reach. [sent-12, score-0.693]
9 Anyway, now I know how that guy felt from last month. [sent-14, score-0.175]
10 My talk was all prepared, I was eager to go on, but then it didn’t quite work. [sent-15, score-0.696]
11 I ended up pushing the material out there without any flow. [sent-16, score-0.334]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('talk', 0.465), ('sap', 0.18), ('politely', 0.18), ('delivered', 0.174), ('stan', 0.174), ('gave', 0.166), ('listened', 0.164), ('crowd', 0.16), ('grabbed', 0.154), ('disaster', 0.152), ('prepared', 0.145), ('eager', 0.141), ('flow', 0.139), ('algebra', 0.139), ('boy', 0.138), ('session', 0.138), ('excited', 0.136), ('really', 0.134), ('pushing', 0.131), ('jim', 0.13), ('spoke', 0.128), ('optimization', 0.125), ('frustrating', 0.125), ('conference', 0.12), ('wonderful', 0.117), ('ended', 0.112), ('exact', 0.111), ('didn', 0.107), ('act', 0.104), ('weeks', 0.103), ('entirely', 0.101), ('audience', 0.099), ('math', 0.099), ('felt', 0.094), ('poor', 0.094), ('graphics', 0.092), ('material', 0.091), ('go', 0.09), ('linear', 0.089), ('followed', 0.088), ('involved', 0.087), ('started', 0.087), ('anyway', 0.081), ('guy', 0.081), ('went', 0.078), ('particularly', 0.076), ('usually', 0.076), ('chance', 0.074), ('group', 0.072), ('wouldn', 0.07)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 1.0000001 548 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-01-What goes around . . .
Introduction: A few weeks ago I delivered a 10-minute talk on statistical graphics that went so well, it was the best-received talk I’ve ever given. The crowd was raucous. Then some poor sap had to go on after me. He started by saying that my talk was a hard act to follow. And, indeed, the audience politely listened but did not really get involved in his presentation. Boy did I feel smug. More recently I gave a talk on Stan, at an entirely different venue. And this time the story was the exact opposite. Jim Demmel spoke first and gave a wonderful talk on optimization for linear algebra (it was an applied math conference). Then I followed, and I never really grabbed the crowd. My talk was not a disaster but it didn’t really work. This was particularly frustrating because I’m really excited about Stan and this was a group of researchers I wouldn’t usually have a chance to reach. It was the plenary session at the conference. Anyway, now I know how that guy felt from last month. My talk
2 0.29087365 2275 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-31-Just gave a talk
Introduction: I just gave a talk in Milan. Actually I was sitting at my desk, it was a g+ hangout which was a bit more convenient for me. The audience was a bunch of astronomers so I figured they could handle a satellite link. . . . Anyway, the talk didn’t go so well. Two reasons: first, it’s just hard to get the connection with the audience without being able to see their faces. Next time I think I’ll try to get several people in the audience to open up their laptops and connect to the hangout, so that I can see a mosaic of faces instead of just a single image from the front of the room. The second problem with the talk was the topic. I asked the people who invited me to choose a topic, and they picked Can we use Bayesian methods to resolve the current crisis of statistically-significant research findings that don’t hold up? But I don’t think this was right for this audience. I think that it would’ve been better to give them the Stan talk or the little data talk or the statistic
3 0.20228086 407 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-11-Data Visualization vs. Statistical Graphics
Introduction: I have this great talk on the above topic but nowhere to give it. Here’s the story. Several months ago, I was invited to speak at IEEE VisWeek. It sounded like a great opportunity. The organizer told me that there were typically about 700 people in the audience, and these are people in the visualization community whom I’d like to reach but normally wouldn’t have the opportunity to encounter. It sounded great, but I didn’t want to fly most of the way across the country by myself, so I offered to give the talk by videolink. I was surprised to get a No response: I’d think that a visualization conference, of all things, would welcome a video talk. In the meantime, though, I’d thought a lot about what I’d talk about and had started preparing something. Once I found out I wouldn’t be giving the talk, I channeled the efforts into an article which, with the collaboration of Antony Unwin, was completed about a month ago. It would take very little effort to adapt this graph-laden a
4 0.18961769 1143 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-29-G+ > Skype
Introduction: I spoke at the University of Kansas the other day. Kansas is far away so I gave the talk by video. We did it using a G+ hangout, and it worked really well, much much better than when I gave a talk via Skype . With G+, I could see and hear the audience clearly, and they could hear me just fine while seeing my slides (or my face, I went back and forth). Not as good as a live presentation but pretty good, considering. P.S. And here’s how to do it! Conflict of interest disclaimer: I was paid by Google last year to give a short course.
5 0.1754251 1450 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-08-My upcoming talk for the data visualization meetup
Introduction: Somebody asked me to speak sometime at a data visualization meetup. I think I spoke there a year or two ago but I could do it again. Last time I spoke on Infovis vs Statistical Graphics , this time I could just go thru the choices involved in a few zillion graphs I’ve published over the years, to give a sense of the options and choices involved in graphical communication. For this talk there would be no single theme (except, perhaps, my usual “Graphs as comparisons,” “All of statistics as comparisons,” and “Exploratory data analysis as hypothesis testing”), just a bunch of open discussion about what I tried, why I tried it, what worked and what didn’t work, etc. I’ve discussed these sorts of decisions on occasion (and am now writing a paper with Yair about some of this for our voting models), but I’ve never tried to make a talk out of it before. Could be fun.
6 0.17061588 438 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-30-I just skyped in from Kentucky, and boy are my arms tired
7 0.16314715 1668 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-11-My talk at the NY data visualization meetup this Monday!
8 0.16110295 2116 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-28-“Statistics is what people think math is”
9 0.15684493 1131 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-20-Stan: A (Bayesian) Directed Graphical Model Compiler
10 0.13804859 1673 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-15-My talk last night at the visualization meetup
11 0.13681524 1050 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-10-Presenting at the econ seminar
12 0.13496439 1598 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-30-A graphics talk with no visuals!
13 0.13108867 1197 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-04-“All Models are Right, Most are Useless”
14 0.13064615 1126 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-18-Bob on Stan
15 0.12980519 1772 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-20-Stan at Google this Thurs and at Berkeley this Fri noon
16 0.12947483 913 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-16-Groundhog day in August?
17 0.12360568 2161 andrew gelman stats-2014-01-07-My recent debugging experience
18 0.11740577 390 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-02-Fragment of statistical autobiography
20 0.11253227 1475 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-30-A Stan is Born
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.137), (1, -0.053), (2, -0.089), (3, 0.091), (4, 0.064), (5, 0.031), (6, -0.003), (7, -0.073), (8, -0.045), (9, -0.107), (10, -0.079), (11, 0.041), (12, 0.0), (13, -0.025), (14, 0.039), (15, -0.132), (16, -0.049), (17, -0.053), (18, 0.062), (19, 0.071), (20, -0.143), (21, -0.125), (22, 0.068), (23, -0.014), (24, -0.042), (25, 0.011), (26, -0.15), (27, -0.164), (28, 0.005), (29, -0.05), (30, 0.021), (31, 0.042), (32, 0.03), (33, -0.01), (34, 0.045), (35, -0.025), (36, 0.103), (37, 0.021), (38, 0.033), (39, -0.051), (40, -0.005), (41, 0.022), (42, 0.048), (43, 0.012), (44, -0.025), (45, -0.067), (46, 0.058), (47, 0.006), (48, -0.027), (49, -0.004)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.99297488 548 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-01-What goes around . . .
Introduction: A few weeks ago I delivered a 10-minute talk on statistical graphics that went so well, it was the best-received talk I’ve ever given. The crowd was raucous. Then some poor sap had to go on after me. He started by saying that my talk was a hard act to follow. And, indeed, the audience politely listened but did not really get involved in his presentation. Boy did I feel smug. More recently I gave a talk on Stan, at an entirely different venue. And this time the story was the exact opposite. Jim Demmel spoke first and gave a wonderful talk on optimization for linear algebra (it was an applied math conference). Then I followed, and I never really grabbed the crowd. My talk was not a disaster but it didn’t really work. This was particularly frustrating because I’m really excited about Stan and this was a group of researchers I wouldn’t usually have a chance to reach. It was the plenary session at the conference. Anyway, now I know how that guy felt from last month. My talk
2 0.89784831 2275 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-31-Just gave a talk
Introduction: I just gave a talk in Milan. Actually I was sitting at my desk, it was a g+ hangout which was a bit more convenient for me. The audience was a bunch of astronomers so I figured they could handle a satellite link. . . . Anyway, the talk didn’t go so well. Two reasons: first, it’s just hard to get the connection with the audience without being able to see their faces. Next time I think I’ll try to get several people in the audience to open up their laptops and connect to the hangout, so that I can see a mosaic of faces instead of just a single image from the front of the room. The second problem with the talk was the topic. I asked the people who invited me to choose a topic, and they picked Can we use Bayesian methods to resolve the current crisis of statistically-significant research findings that don’t hold up? But I don’t think this was right for this audience. I think that it would’ve been better to give them the Stan talk or the little data talk or the statistic
3 0.86345494 1598 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-30-A graphics talk with no visuals!
Introduction: So, I’m at MIT, twenty minutes into my talk on tradeoffs in information graphics to the computer scientists, when the power goes out. They had some dim backup lighting so we weren’t all sitting there in the dark, but the projector wasn’t working. So I took questions for the remaining 40 minutes. It went well, perhaps better than the actual talk would’ve gone, even though they didn’t get to see most of my slides .
4 0.85715997 2039 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-25-Harmonic convergence
Introduction: Diederik Stapel gives a Ted talk . Sometimes, reality truly is a parody of reality.
5 0.85502934 407 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-11-Data Visualization vs. Statistical Graphics
Introduction: I have this great talk on the above topic but nowhere to give it. Here’s the story. Several months ago, I was invited to speak at IEEE VisWeek. It sounded like a great opportunity. The organizer told me that there were typically about 700 people in the audience, and these are people in the visualization community whom I’d like to reach but normally wouldn’t have the opportunity to encounter. It sounded great, but I didn’t want to fly most of the way across the country by myself, so I offered to give the talk by videolink. I was surprised to get a No response: I’d think that a visualization conference, of all things, would welcome a video talk. In the meantime, though, I’d thought a lot about what I’d talk about and had started preparing something. Once I found out I wouldn’t be giving the talk, I channeled the efforts into an article which, with the collaboration of Antony Unwin, was completed about a month ago. It would take very little effort to adapt this graph-laden a
6 0.80787426 1073 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-20-Not quite getting the point
7 0.7908445 1143 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-29-G+ > Skype
8 0.77739108 438 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-30-I just skyped in from Kentucky, and boy are my arms tired
10 0.74636984 2116 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-28-“Statistics is what people think math is”
11 0.71972054 1131 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-20-Stan: A (Bayesian) Directed Graphical Model Compiler
12 0.7183795 1821 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-24-My talk midtown this Friday noon (and at Columbia Monday afternoon)
13 0.71211255 699 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-06-Another stereotype demolished
14 0.70979398 1673 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-15-My talk last night at the visualization meetup
15 0.7089504 1126 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-18-Bob on Stan
16 0.69166577 913 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-16-Groundhog day in August?
17 0.67791677 1050 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-10-Presenting at the econ seminar
18 0.67379236 2323 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-07-Cause he thinks he’s so-phisticated
19 0.63721329 1824 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-25-Fascinating graphs from facebook data
20 0.62938595 1450 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-08-My upcoming talk for the data visualization meetup
topicId topicWeight
[(2, 0.022), (16, 0.123), (17, 0.018), (21, 0.033), (24, 0.181), (40, 0.05), (47, 0.057), (59, 0.022), (73, 0.017), (86, 0.03), (87, 0.126), (99, 0.215)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.95631707 548 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-01-What goes around . . .
Introduction: A few weeks ago I delivered a 10-minute talk on statistical graphics that went so well, it was the best-received talk I’ve ever given. The crowd was raucous. Then some poor sap had to go on after me. He started by saying that my talk was a hard act to follow. And, indeed, the audience politely listened but did not really get involved in his presentation. Boy did I feel smug. More recently I gave a talk on Stan, at an entirely different venue. And this time the story was the exact opposite. Jim Demmel spoke first and gave a wonderful talk on optimization for linear algebra (it was an applied math conference). Then I followed, and I never really grabbed the crowd. My talk was not a disaster but it didn’t really work. This was particularly frustrating because I’m really excited about Stan and this was a group of researchers I wouldn’t usually have a chance to reach. It was the plenary session at the conference. Anyway, now I know how that guy felt from last month. My talk
2 0.9234165 355 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-20-Andy vs. the Ideal Point Model of Voting
Introduction: Last week, as I walked into Andrew’s office for a meeting, he was formulating some misgivings about applying an ideal-point model to budgetary bills in the U.S. Senate. Andrew didn’t like that the model of a senator’s position was an indifference point rather than at their optimal point, and that the effect of moving away from a position was automatically modeled as increasing in one direction and decreasing in the other. Executive Summary The monotonicity of inverse logit entails that the expected vote for a bill among any fixed collection of senators’ ideal points is monotonically increasing (or decreasing) with the bill’s position, with direction determined by the outcome coding. The Ideal-Point Model The ideal-point model’s easy to write down, but hard to reason about because of all the polarity shifting going on. To recapitulate from Gelman and Hill’s Regression book (p. 317), using the U.S. Senate instead of the Supreme Court, and ignoring the dis
3 0.92051136 918 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-21-Avoiding boundary estimates in linear mixed models
Introduction: Pablo Verde sends in this letter he and Daniel Curcio just published in the Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. They had published a meta-analysis with a boundary estimate which, he said, gave nonsense results. Here’s Curcio and Verde’s key paragraph: The authors [of the study they are criticizing] performed a test of heterogeneity between studies. Given that the test result was not significant at 5%, they decided to pool all the RRs by using a fixed-effect meta-analysis model. Unfortunately, this is a common practice in meta-analysis, which usually leads to very misleading results. First of all, the pooled RR as well as its standard error are sensitive to 2 the estimation of the between-studies standard deviation (SD). SD is difficult to estimate with a small number of studies. On the other hand, it is very well known that the significant test of hetero- geneity lacks statistical power to detect values of SD greater than zero. In addition, the statistically non-significant re
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
5 0.90789139 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).
7 0.89741331 783 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-30-Don’t stop being a statistician once the analysis is done
8 0.88167626 799 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-13-Hypothesis testing with multiple imputations
9 0.88110071 1019 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-19-Validation of Software for Bayesian Models Using Posterior Quantiles
11 0.87813079 1868 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-23-Validation of Software for Bayesian Models Using Posterior Quantiles
12 0.87785059 1293 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-01-Huff the Magic Dragon
13 0.87666476 1155 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-05-What is a prior distribution?
14 0.87482142 1871 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-27-Annals of spam
15 0.87429321 1206 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-10-95% intervals that I don’t believe, because they’re from a flat prior I don’t believe
16 0.87283945 252 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-02-R needs a good function to make line plots
17 0.87221766 599 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-03-Two interesting posts elsewhere on graphics
18 0.87201083 898 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-10-Fourteen magic words: an update
19 0.87169123 1080 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-24-Latest in blog advertising
20 0.8714968 2086 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-03-How best to compare effects measured in two different time periods?