andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2011 andrew_gelman_stats-2011-843 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: Dave Backus writes: I would love to see a better version of this [from Steve Hsu] if you have time. My reply: I actually think the graph is ok. It’s not perfect but it’s dieplaying a small set of numbers in a reasonably clear and coherent way! Everybody thinks I’m a curmudgeon but I like to mix it up on occasion and say something nice.
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 Dave Backus writes: I would love to see a better version of this [from Steve Hsu] if you have time. [sent-1, score-0.509]
2 It’s not perfect but it’s dieplaying a small set of numbers in a reasonably clear and coherent way! [sent-3, score-1.124]
3 Everybody thinks I’m a curmudgeon but I like to mix it up on occasion and say something nice. [sent-4, score-1.25]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('curmudgeon', 0.389), ('backus', 0.338), ('hsu', 0.286), ('occasion', 0.257), ('dave', 0.248), ('coherent', 0.231), ('reasonably', 0.224), ('steve', 0.22), ('thinks', 0.21), ('mix', 0.203), ('perfect', 0.193), ('everybody', 0.187), ('nice', 0.182), ('version', 0.171), ('love', 0.159), ('numbers', 0.134), ('graph', 0.134), ('clear', 0.116), ('small', 0.116), ('reply', 0.113), ('set', 0.11), ('actually', 0.085), ('better', 0.085), ('something', 0.075), ('say', 0.074), ('way', 0.061), ('writes', 0.059), ('see', 0.051), ('would', 0.043), ('like', 0.042), ('think', 0.042)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 1.0 843 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-07-Non-rant
Introduction: Dave Backus writes: I would love to see a better version of this [from Steve Hsu] if you have time. My reply: I actually think the graph is ok. It’s not perfect but it’s dieplaying a small set of numbers in a reasonably clear and coherent way! Everybody thinks I’m a curmudgeon but I like to mix it up on occasion and say something nice.
Introduction: See page 179 here for Gowa’s review from 1986. And here’s my version (from 2008).
3 0.11024747 578 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-17-Credentialism, elite employment, and career aspirations
Introduction: Steve Hsu has posted a series of reflections here , here , and here on the dominance of graduates of HYPS (Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford (in that order, I believe)) in various Master-of-the-Universe-type jobs at “elite law firms, consultancies, and I-banks, hedge/venture funds, startups, and technology companies.” Hsu writes: In the real world, people believe in folk notions of brainpower or IQ. (“Quick on the uptake”, “Picks things up really fast”, “A sponge” …) They count on elite educational institutions to do their g-filtering for them. . . . Most top firms only recruit at a few schools. A kid from a non-elite UG school has very little chance of finding a job at one of these places unless they first go to grad school at, e.g., HBS, HLS, or get a PhD from a top place. (By top place I don’t mean “gee US News says Ohio State’s Aero E program is top 5!” — I mean, e.g., a math PhD from Berkeley or a PhD in computer science from MIT — the traditional top dogs in academ
4 0.10427645 432 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-27-Neumann update
Introduction: Steve Hsu, who started off this discussion, had some comments on my speculations on the personality of John von Neumann and others. Steve writes: I [Hsu] actually knew Feynman a bit when I was an undergrad, and found him to be very nice to students. Since then I have heard quite a few stories from people in theoretical physics which emphasize his nastier side, and I think in the end he was quite a complicated person like everyone else. There are a couple of pseudo-biographies of vN, but none as high quality as, e.g., Gleick’s book on Feynman or Hodges book about Turing. (Gleick studied physics as an undergrad at Harvard, and Hodges is a PhD in mathematical physics — pretty rare backgrounds for biographers!) For example, as mentioned on the comment thread to your post, Steve Heims wrote a book about both vN and Wiener (!), and Norman Macrae wrote a biography of vN. Both books are worth reading, but I think neither really do him justice. The breadth of vN’s work is just too m
5 0.10318221 1723 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-15-Wacky priors can work well?
Introduction: Dave Judkins writes: I would love to see a blog entry on this article , Bayesian Model Selection in High-Dimensional Settings, by Valen Johnson and David Rossell. The simulation results are very encouraging although the choice of colors for some of the graphics is unfortunate. Unless I am colorblind in some way that I am unaware of, they have two thin charcoal lines that are indistinguishable. When Dave Judkins puts in a request, I’ll respond. Also, I’m always happy to see a new Val Johnson paper. Val and I are contemporaries—he and I got our PhD’s at around the same time, with both of us working on Bayesian image reconstruction, then in the early 1990s Val was part of the legendary group at Duke’s Institute of Statistics and Decision Sciences—a veritable ’27 Yankees featuring Mike West, Merlise Clyde, Michael Lavine, Dave Higdon, Peter Mueller, Val, and a bunch of others. I always thought it was too bad they all had to go their separate ways. Val also wrote two classic p
6 0.10202873 950 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-10-“Causality is almost always in doubt”
7 0.077819958 430 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-25-The von Neumann paradox
8 0.077035703 835 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-02-“The sky is the limit” isn’t such a good thing
10 0.071159549 814 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-21-The powerful consumer?
11 0.069958515 2154 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-30-Bill Gates’s favorite graph of the year
12 0.069089726 502 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-04-Cash in, cash out graph
13 0.068909124 1253 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-08-Technology speedup graph
14 0.065847702 2103 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-16-Objects of the class “Objects of the class”
15 0.064443812 466 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-13-“The truth wears off: Is there something wrong with the scientific method?”
16 0.063458189 1176 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-19-Standardized writing styles and standardized graphing styles
18 0.060974553 2266 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-25-A statistical graphics course and statistical graphics advice
19 0.059860505 976 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-27-Geophysicist Discovers Modeling Error (in Economics)
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.093), (1, -0.014), (2, -0.0), (3, 0.04), (4, 0.052), (5, -0.062), (6, 0.002), (7, 0.027), (8, 0.011), (9, -0.008), (10, 0.005), (11, -0.001), (12, -0.017), (13, -0.004), (14, -0.0), (15, 0.015), (16, 0.005), (17, 0.006), (18, 0.008), (19, 0.021), (20, -0.007), (21, 0.038), (22, -0.004), (23, 0.004), (24, -0.004), (25, -0.013), (26, 0.014), (27, -0.006), (28, -0.043), (29, -0.007), (30, 0.025), (31, -0.016), (32, -0.048), (33, -0.037), (34, -0.024), (35, -0.03), (36, -0.012), (37, -0.027), (38, -0.005), (39, 0.059), (40, 0.029), (41, -0.005), (42, 0.033), (43, 0.047), (44, -0.012), (45, -0.009), (46, 0.005), (47, -0.009), (48, -0.008), (49, -0.029)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.969069 843 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-07-Non-rant
Introduction: Dave Backus writes: I would love to see a better version of this [from Steve Hsu] if you have time. My reply: I actually think the graph is ok. It’s not perfect but it’s dieplaying a small set of numbers in a reasonably clear and coherent way! Everybody thinks I’m a curmudgeon but I like to mix it up on occasion and say something nice.
2 0.83109665 671 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-20-One more time-use graph
Introduction: Evan Hensleigh sens me this redesign of the cross-national time use graph : Here was my version: And here was the original: Compared to my graph, Evan’s has better fonts, and that’s important–good fonts can make a display look professional. But I’m not sure about his other innovations. To me, the different colors for the different time-use categories are more of a distraction than a visual aid, and I also don’t like how he made the bars fatter. As I noted in my earlier entry, to me this draws unwanted attention to the negative space between the bars. His country labels are slightly misaligned (particularly Japan and USA), and I really don’t like his horizontal axis at all! He removed the units of hours and put + and – on the edges so that the axes run into each other. What was the point of that? It’s bad news. Also I don’t see any advantage at all to the prehensile tick marks. On the other hand, if Evgn and I were working together on such a graph, we w
3 0.82644945 443 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-02-Automating my graphics advice
Introduction: After seeing this graph : I have the following message for Sharad: Rotate the graph 90 degrees so you can see the words. Also you can ditch the lines. Then what you have is a dotplot, following the principles of Cleveland (1985). You can lay out a few on one page to see some interactions with demographics. The real challenge here . . . . . . is to automate this sort of advice. Or maybe we just need a really nice dotplot() function and enough examples, and people will start doing it? P.S. Often a lineplot is better. See here for a discussion of another Sharad example.
4 0.80295664 502 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-04-Cash in, cash out graph
Introduction: David Afshartous writes: I thought this graph [from Ed Easterling] might be good for your blog. The 71 outlined squares show the main story, and the regions of the graph present the information nicely. Looks like the bins for the color coding are not of equal size and of course the end bins are unbounded. Might be interesting to graph the distribution of the actual data for the 71 outlined squares. In addition, I assume that each period begins on Jan 1 so data size could be naturally increased by looking at intervals that start on June 1 as well (where the limit of this process would be to have it at the granularity of one day; while it most likely wouldn’t make much difference, I’ve seen some graphs before where 1 year returns can be quite sensitive to starting date, etc). I agree that (a) the graph could be improved in small ways–in particular, adding half-year data seems like a great idea–and (b) it’s a wonderful, wonderful graph as is. And the NYT graphics people ad
5 0.8022753 1011 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-15-World record running times vs. distance
Introduction: Julyan Arbel plots world record running times vs. distance (on the log-log scale): The line has a slope of 1.1. I think it would be clearer to plot speed vs. distance—then you’d get a slope of -0.1, and the numbers would be more directly interpretable. Indeed, this paper by Sandra Savaglio and Vincenzo Carbone (referred to in the comments on Julyan’s blog) plots speed vs. time. Graphing by speed gives more resolution: The upper-left graph in the grid corresponds to the human running records plotted by Arbel. It’s funny that Arbel sees only one line whereas Savaglio and Carbone see two—but if you remove the 100m record at one end and the 100km at the other end, you can see two lines in Arbel’s graph as well. The bottom two graphs show swimming records. Knut would probably have something to say about all this.
6 0.79959005 2154 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-30-Bill Gates’s favorite graph of the year
8 0.79667568 1253 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-08-Technology speedup graph
9 0.79369509 1104 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-07-A compelling reason to go to London, Ontario??
11 0.76956606 1684 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-20-Ugly ugly ugly
12 0.76627797 670 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-20-Attractive but hard-to-read graph could be made much much better
13 0.75943106 1258 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-10-Why display 6 years instead of 30?
14 0.75361478 1376 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-12-Simple graph WIN: the example of birthday frequencies
15 0.74542689 1357 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-01-Halloween-Valentine’s update
16 0.74317843 488 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-27-Graph of the year
17 0.74266523 134 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-08-“What do you think about curved lines connecting discrete data-points?”
18 0.7380625 2091 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-06-“Marginally significant”
19 0.73554194 1439 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-01-A book with a bunch of simple graphs
topicId topicWeight
[(15, 0.043), (21, 0.051), (24, 0.207), (62, 0.044), (85, 0.231), (95, 0.043), (99, 0.222)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
1 0.9419564 1534 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-15-The strange reappearance of Matthew Klam
Introduction: A few years ago I asked what happened to Matthew Klam, a talented writer who has a bizarrely professional-looking webpage but didn’t seem to be writing anymore. Good news! He published a new story in the New Yorker! Confusingly, he wrote it under the name “Justin Taylor,” but I’m not fooled (any more than I was fooled when that posthumous Updike story was published under the name “ Antonya Nelson “). I’m glad to see that Klam is back in action and look forward to seeing some stories under his own name as well.
same-blog 2 0.90262473 843 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-07-Non-rant
Introduction: Dave Backus writes: I would love to see a better version of this [from Steve Hsu] if you have time. My reply: I actually think the graph is ok. It’s not perfect but it’s dieplaying a small set of numbers in a reasonably clear and coherent way! Everybody thinks I’m a curmudgeon but I like to mix it up on occasion and say something nice.
3 0.88682401 533 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-23-The scalarization of America
Introduction: Mark Palko writes : You lose information when you go from a vector to a scalar. But what about this trick, which they told me about in high school? Combine two dimensions into one by interleaving the decimals. For example, if a=.11111 and b=.22222, then (a,b) = .1212121212.
4 0.86607343 912 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-15-n = 2
Introduction: People in Chicago are nice. The conductor on the train came by and I asked if I could buy a ticket right there. He said yes, $2.50. While I was getting the money he asked if the ticket machine at the station had been broken. I said, I don’t know, I saw the train and ran up the stairs to catch it. He said, that’s not what you’re supposed to say. So I said, that’s right, the machine was broken. It’s just like on that radio show where Peter Sagal hems and haws to clue the contestant in that his guess is wrong so he can try again.
5 0.85345984 330 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-09-What joker put seven dog lice in my Iraqi fez box?
Introduction: New Sentences For The Testing Of Typewriters (from John Lennon ): Fetching killjoy Mavis Wax was probed on the quay. “Yo, never mix Zoloft with Quik,” gabs Doc Jasper. One zany quaff is vodka mixed with grape juice and blood. Zitty Vicki smugly quipped in her journal, “Fay waxes her butt.” Hot Wendy gave me quasi-Kreutzfeld-Jacob pox. Jack’s pervy moxie quashed Bob’s new Liszt fugue. I backed Zevy’s qualms over Janet’s wig of phlox. Tipsy Bangkok panjandrums fix elections with quivering zeal. Mexican juntas, viewed in fog, piqued Zachary, killed Rob. Jaywalking Zulu chieftains vex probate judge Marcy Quinn. Twenty-six Excedrin helped give Jocko quite a firm buzz. Racy pics of bed hijinx with glam queen sunk Val. Why Paxil? Jim’s Bodega stocked no quince-flavor Pez. Wavy-haired quints of El Paz mock Jorge by fax. Two phony quacks of God bi-exorcize evil mojo.
6 0.85013342 1790 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-06-Calling Jenny Davidson . . .
7 0.84622848 610 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-13-Secret weapon with rare events
8 0.82584864 1374 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-11-Convergence Monitoring for Non-Identifiable and Non-Parametric Models
9 0.82551777 2300 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-21-Ticket to Baaaath
10 0.82347333 417 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-17-Clutering and variance components
11 0.81501436 375 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-28-Matching for preprocessing data for causal inference
12 0.80972981 1899 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-14-Turing chess tournament!
14 0.80021954 2319 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-05-Can we make better graphs of global temperature history?
15 0.78754365 2086 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-03-How best to compare effects measured in two different time periods?
16 0.78741515 278 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-15-Advice that might make sense for individuals but is negative-sum overall
17 0.78567982 58 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-29-Stupid legal crap
19 0.78233027 896 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-09-My homework success
20 0.77903515 2264 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-24-On deck this month