andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2011 andrew_gelman_stats-2011-890 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: New blog from the philosopher Deborah Mayo who I think agrees with me about many statistical issues although from a non-Bayesian perspective. But I disagree with her when she writes that certain criticisms of frequentist statistical methods “keep popping up (verbatim) in every Bayesian textbook and article on philosophical foundations.” I’ve written a couple of Bayesian textbooks and some articles on philosophical foundations, and I don’t think I do this! That said, I think Mayo has a lot to say, so I wouldn’t judge her whole blog (let alone her published work) based on that one intemperate statement.
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 New blog from the philosopher Deborah Mayo who I think agrees with me about many statistical issues although from a non-Bayesian perspective. [sent-1, score-0.985]
2 But I disagree with her when she writes that certain criticisms of frequentist statistical methods “keep popping up (verbatim) in every Bayesian textbook and article on philosophical foundations. [sent-2, score-1.703]
3 ” I’ve written a couple of Bayesian textbooks and some articles on philosophical foundations, and I don’t think I do this! [sent-3, score-0.91]
4 That said, I think Mayo has a lot to say, so I wouldn’t judge her whole blog (let alone her published work) based on that one intemperate statement. [sent-4, score-1.138]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('mayo', 0.369), ('philosophical', 0.353), ('popping', 0.263), ('intemperate', 0.263), ('verbatim', 0.236), ('philosopher', 0.216), ('agrees', 0.197), ('deborah', 0.185), ('foundations', 0.181), ('textbooks', 0.165), ('textbook', 0.164), ('judge', 0.162), ('frequentist', 0.157), ('alone', 0.156), ('criticisms', 0.151), ('bayesian', 0.145), ('disagree', 0.132), ('blog', 0.124), ('statement', 0.122), ('certain', 0.113), ('statistical', 0.107), ('articles', 0.104), ('whole', 0.102), ('written', 0.102), ('issues', 0.1), ('although', 0.099), ('keep', 0.099), ('wouldn', 0.098), ('couple', 0.095), ('think', 0.091), ('every', 0.086), ('methods', 0.081), ('published', 0.081), ('said', 0.079), ('let', 0.078), ('based', 0.069), ('lot', 0.062), ('article', 0.054), ('say', 0.053), ('many', 0.051), ('new', 0.05), ('work', 0.048), ('ve', 0.047), ('writes', 0.042), ('one', 0.028)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.99999988 890 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-05-Error statistics
Introduction: New blog from the philosopher Deborah Mayo who I think agrees with me about many statistical issues although from a non-Bayesian perspective. But I disagree with her when she writes that certain criticisms of frequentist statistical methods “keep popping up (verbatim) in every Bayesian textbook and article on philosophical foundations.” I’ve written a couple of Bayesian textbooks and some articles on philosophical foundations, and I don’t think I do this! That said, I think Mayo has a lot to say, so I wouldn’t judge her whole blog (let alone her published work) based on that one intemperate statement.
2 0.27250966 1433 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-28-LOL without the CATS
Introduction: Mayo points me to this discussion [link fixed] on parsimony by philosopher Elliott Sober. I don’t really understand what he’s talking about but I am posting the link here because it might interest some of you. P.S. More discussion on this from Mayo here .
3 0.25418529 932 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-30-Articles on the philosophy of Bayesian statistics by Cox, Mayo, Senn, and others!
Introduction: Deborah Mayo, Aris Spanos, and Kent Staley edited a special issue on the philosophy of Bayesian statistics for the journal Rationality, Markets and Morals. Here are the contents : David Cox and Deborah G. Mayo, “Statistical Scientist Meets a Philosopher of Science: A Conversation” Deborah G. Mayo, “Statistical Science and Philosophy of Science: Where Do/Should They Meet in 2011 (and Beyond)?” Stephen Senn, “You May Believe You Are a Bayesian But You Are Probably Wrong” Andrew Gelman, “ Induction and Deduction in Bayesian Data Analysis “ Jan Sprenger, “The Renegade Subjectivist: Jose Bernardo’s Objective Bayesianism” Aris Spanos. “Foundational Issues in Statistical Modeling: Statistical Model Specification and Validation” David F. Hendry, “Empirical Economic Model Discovery and Theory Evaluation” Larry Wasserman, “Low Assumptions, High Dimensions” For some reason, not all the articles are yet online, but it says they’re coming soon. In the meantime, you ca
4 0.21388747 1205 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-09-Coming to agreement on philosophy of statistics
Introduction: Deborah Mayo collected some reactions to my recent article , Induction and Deduction in Bayesian Data Analysis. I’m pleased that that everybody (philosopher Mayo, applied statistician Stephen Senn, and theoretical statistician Larry Wasserman) is so positive about my article and that nobody’s defending the sort of hard-core inductivism that’s featured on the Bayesian inference wikipedia page. Here’s the Wikipedia definition, which I disagree with: Bayesian inference uses aspects of the scientific method, which involves collecting evidence that is meant to be consistent or inconsistent with a given hypothesis. As evidence accumulates, the degree of belief in a hypothesis ought to change. With enough evidence, it should become very high or very low. . . . Bayesian inference uses a numerical estimate of the degree of belief in a hypothesis before evidence has been observed and calculates a numerical estimate of the degree of belief in the hypothesis after evidence has been obse
5 0.21372508 1181 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-23-Philosophy: Pointer to Salmon
Introduction: Larry Brownstein writes: I read your article on induction and deduction and your comments on Deborah Mayo’s approach and thought you might find the following useful in this discussion. It is Wesley Salmon’s Reality and Rationality (2005). Here he argues that Bayesian inferential procedures can replace the hypothetical-deductive method aka the Hempel-Oppenheim theory of explanation. He is concerned about the subjectivity problem, so takes a frequentist approach to the use of Bayes in this context. Hardly anyone agrees that the H-D approach accounts for scientific explanation. The problem has been to find a replacement. Salmon thought he had found it. I don’t know this book—but that’s no surprise since I know just about none of the philosophy of science literature that came after Popper, Kuhn, and Lakatos. That’s why I collaborated with Cosma Shalizi. He’s the one who connected me to Deborah Mayo and who put in the recent philosophy references in our articles. Anyway, I’m pa
6 0.19566473 291 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-22-Philosophy of Bayes and non-Bayes: A dialogue with Deborah Mayo
7 0.14933529 1438 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-31-What is a Bayesian?
8 0.1426923 1719 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-11-Why waste time philosophizing?
9 0.13468851 534 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-24-Bayes at the end
10 0.12375508 117 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-29-Ya don’t know Bayes, Jack
11 0.11447232 1208 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-11-Gelman on Hennig on Gelman on Bayes
12 0.10915489 1149 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-01-Philosophy of Bayesian statistics: my reactions to Cox and Mayo
13 0.10870682 1572 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-10-I don’t like this cartoon
14 0.10858748 767 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-15-Error in an attribution of an error
16 0.10678668 1712 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-07-Philosophy and the practice of Bayesian statistics (with all the discussions!)
17 0.10059045 781 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-28-The holes in my philosophy of Bayesian data analysis
18 0.098630212 1781 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-29-Another Feller theory
19 0.097856112 1087 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-27-“Keeping things unridiculous”: Berger, O’Hagan, and me on weakly informative priors
20 0.097565703 1571 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-09-The anti-Bayesian moment and its passing
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.134), (1, 0.045), (2, -0.107), (3, 0.028), (4, -0.127), (5, -0.019), (6, -0.04), (7, 0.056), (8, 0.046), (9, -0.083), (10, 0.034), (11, -0.068), (12, 0.016), (13, 0.055), (14, 0.06), (15, 0.04), (16, -0.008), (17, 0.026), (18, -0.028), (19, 0.051), (20, 0.01), (21, 0.024), (22, -0.022), (23, 0.047), (24, 0.038), (25, -0.041), (26, -0.023), (27, 0.007), (28, -0.019), (29, -0.012), (30, 0.045), (31, 0.035), (32, 0.044), (33, 0.015), (34, 0.044), (35, -0.002), (36, 0.018), (37, 0.018), (38, 0.016), (39, -0.006), (40, -0.003), (41, 0.018), (42, 0.031), (43, 0.005), (44, 0.0), (45, 0.053), (46, -0.04), (47, -0.003), (48, -0.065), (49, 0.016)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.97096586 890 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-05-Error statistics
Introduction: New blog from the philosopher Deborah Mayo who I think agrees with me about many statistical issues although from a non-Bayesian perspective. But I disagree with her when she writes that certain criticisms of frequentist statistical methods “keep popping up (verbatim) in every Bayesian textbook and article on philosophical foundations.” I’ve written a couple of Bayesian textbooks and some articles on philosophical foundations, and I don’t think I do this! That said, I think Mayo has a lot to say, so I wouldn’t judge her whole blog (let alone her published work) based on that one intemperate statement.
2 0.81743348 1781 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-29-Another Feller theory
Introduction: My paper with Christian Robert, “Not Only Defended But Also Applied”: The Perceived Absurdity of Bayesian Inference , was recently published in The American Statistician, along with discussions by Steve Fienberg, Steve Stigler, Deborah Mayo, and Wesley Johnson, and our rejoinder, The Anti-Bayesian Moment and Its Passing . These articles revolved around the question of why the great probabilist William Feller, in his classic book on probability (“Feller, Volume 1,” as it is known), was so intemperately anti-Bayesian. We located Feller’s attitude within a post-WW2 “anti-Bayesian moment” in which Bayesian inference was perceived as a threat to the dominance of non-Bayesian methods, which were mature enough to have solved problems yet new enough to still appear to have limitless promise. Howard Wainer read this. Howard is a friend who has a longstanding interest in the history of statistics and who also has known a lot of important statisticians over the years. Howard writes: O
3 0.80885488 1181 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-23-Philosophy: Pointer to Salmon
Introduction: Larry Brownstein writes: I read your article on induction and deduction and your comments on Deborah Mayo’s approach and thought you might find the following useful in this discussion. It is Wesley Salmon’s Reality and Rationality (2005). Here he argues that Bayesian inferential procedures can replace the hypothetical-deductive method aka the Hempel-Oppenheim theory of explanation. He is concerned about the subjectivity problem, so takes a frequentist approach to the use of Bayes in this context. Hardly anyone agrees that the H-D approach accounts for scientific explanation. The problem has been to find a replacement. Salmon thought he had found it. I don’t know this book—but that’s no surprise since I know just about none of the philosophy of science literature that came after Popper, Kuhn, and Lakatos. That’s why I collaborated with Cosma Shalizi. He’s the one who connected me to Deborah Mayo and who put in the recent philosophy references in our articles. Anyway, I’m pa
Introduction: Updated version of my paper with Xian: The missionary zeal of many Bayesians of old has been matched, in the other direction, by an attitude among some theoreticians that Bayesian methods are absurd—not merely misguided but obviously wrong in principle. We consider several examples, beginning with Feller’s classic text on probability theory and continuing with more recent cases such as the perceived Bayesian nature of the so-called doomsday argument. We analyze in this note the intellectual background behind various misconceptions about Bayesian statistics, without aiming at a complete historical coverage of the reasons for this dismissal. I love this stuff.
5 0.78301823 453 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-07-Biostatistics via Pragmatic and Perceptive Bayes.
Introduction: This conference touches nicely on many of the more Biostatistics related topics that have come up on this blog from a pragmatic and perceptive Bayesian perspective. Fourth Annual Bayesian Biostatistics Conference Including the star of that recent Cochrane TV debate who will be the key note speaker. See here Subtle statistical issues to be debated on TV. and perhaps the last comment which is my personal take on that debate. Reruns are still available here http://justin.tv/cochranetv/b/272278382 K?
6 0.77336705 1571 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-09-The anti-Bayesian moment and its passing
7 0.7656098 117 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-29-Ya don’t know Bayes, Jack
8 0.76375884 449 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-04-Generalized Method of Moments, whatever that is
9 0.7631619 746 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-05-An unexpected benefit of Arrow’s other theorem
10 0.7620582 932 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-30-Articles on the philosophy of Bayesian statistics by Cox, Mayo, Senn, and others!
11 0.75766385 2000 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-28-Why during the 1950-1960′s did Jerry Cornfield become a Bayesian?
12 0.75556546 110 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-26-Philosophy and the practice of Bayesian statistics
13 0.75174344 2254 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-18-Those wacky anti-Bayesians used to be intimidating, but now they’re just pathetic
14 0.74300319 1205 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-09-Coming to agreement on philosophy of statistics
15 0.73572546 114 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-28-More on Bayesian deduction-induction
16 0.7305795 1610 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-06-Yes, checking calibration of probability forecasts is part of Bayesian statistics
17 0.73003662 1438 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-31-What is a Bayesian?
18 0.71972191 1151 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-03-Philosophy of Bayesian statistics: my reactions to Senn
19 0.71820599 1779 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-27-“Two Dogmas of Strong Objective Bayesianism”
20 0.71509296 1259 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-11-How things sound to us, versus how they sound to others
topicId topicWeight
[(24, 0.126), (72, 0.267), (84, 0.128), (86, 0.035), (99, 0.304)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
1 0.94496977 737 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-30-Memorial Day question
Introduction: When I was a kid they shifted a bunch of holidays to Monday. (Not all the holidays: they kept New Year’s, Christmas, and July 4th on fixed dates, they kept Thanksgiving on a Thursday, and for some reason the shifted Veterans Day didn’t stick. But they successfully moved Washington’s Birthday, Memorial Day, and Columbus Day. It makes sense to give people a 3-day weekend. I have no idea why they picked Monday rather than Friday, but either one would do, I suppose. My question is: if this Monday holiday thing was such a good idea, why did it take them so long to do it?
2 0.92769539 741 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-02-At least he didn’t prove a false theorem
Introduction: Siobhan Mattison pointed me to this . I’m just disappointed they didn’t use my Fenimore Cooper line. Although I guess that reference wouldn’t resonate much outside the U.S. P.S. My guess was correct See comments below. Actually, the reference probably wouldn’t resonate so well among under-50-year-olds in the U.S. either. Sort of like the Jaycees story.
3 0.91772902 1935 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-12-“A tangle of unexamined emotional impulses and illogical responses”
Introduction: Tyler Cowen posts the following note from a taxi driver: I learned very early on to never drive someone to their destination if it was a route they drove themselves, say to their home from the airport . . . Everyone prides themselves on driving the shortest route but they rarely do. . . . When I first started driving a cab, I drove the shortest route—always, I’m ethical—but people would accuse me of taking the long way because it wasn’t the way they drove . . . In the end, experts they consider themselves to be, people are a tangle of unexamined emotional impulses and illogical responses. I take a lot of rides to and from the airport, and I can assure you that a lot of taxi drivers don’t know the good routes. Once I had to start screaming from the back seat to stop the guy from getting on the BQE. I don’t “pride myself” on knowing a good route home from the airport, but I prefer the good route. I’m guessing that the taxi driver quoted above is subject to the same illusions
4 0.90918136 1244 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-03-Meta-analyses of impact evaluations of aid programs
Introduction: Eva Vivalt points me to this . I don’t know anything about it, but I am intrigued by the idea of a meta-analysis being done outside of the usual channels.
5 0.90448725 500 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-03-Bribing statistics
Introduction: I Paid a Bribe by Janaagraha, a Bangalore based not-for-profit, harnesses the collective energy of citizens and asks them to report on the nature, number, pattern, types, location, frequency and values of corruption activities. These reports would be used to argue for improving governance systems and procedures, tightening law enforcement and regulation and thereby reduce the scope for corruption. Here’s a presentation of data from the application: Transparency International could make something like this much more widely available around the world . While awareness is good, follow-up is even better. For example, it’s known that New York’s subway signal inspections were being falsified . Signal inspections are pretty serious stuff, as failures lead to disasters , such as the one in Washington. Nothing much happened after: the person responsible (making $163k a year) was merely reassigned .
6 0.90336597 1179 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-21-“Readability” as freedom from the actual sensation of reading
7 0.90224087 1381 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-16-The Art of Fielding
8 0.89936054 190 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-07-Mister P makes the big jump from the New York Times to the Washington Post
10 0.89167523 84 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-14-Is it 1930?
11 0.88687575 268 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-10-Fighting Migraine with Multilevel Modeling
12 0.88179213 68 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-03-…pretty soon you’re talking real money.
same-blog 13 0.87194157 890 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-05-Error statistics
14 0.86143041 2331 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-12-On deck this week
15 0.85226125 83 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-13-Silly Sas lays out old-fashioned statistical thinking
17 0.84038633 550 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-02-An IV won’t save your life if the line is tangled
18 0.83297598 1079 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-23-Surveys show Americans are populist class warriors, except when they aren’t
20 0.8254841 624 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-22-A question about the economic benefits of universities