andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2012 andrew_gelman_stats-2012-1170 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: From 2.5 years ago . Read all the comments; the discussion is helpful.
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 Read all the comments; the discussion is helpful. [sent-3, score-0.323]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('helpful', 0.616), ('comments', 0.419), ('ago', 0.378), ('read', 0.341), ('discussion', 0.323), ('years', 0.286)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 1.0 1170 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-16-A previous discussion with Charles Murray about liberals, conservatives, and social class
Introduction: From 2.5 years ago . Read all the comments; the discussion is helpful.
2 0.24967963 1399 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-28-Life imitates blog
Introduction: I just noticed this from a couple years ago!
3 0.2466802 1994 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-22-“The comment section is open, but I’m not going to read them”
Introduction: That’s Tyler Cowen’s policy . I read almost all the comments here. I’m glad I read them, I think. Over the years, I’ve learned a lot of interesting things from the comments. Sometimes, though, I wish I hadn’t bothered. Cowen gets about 10 times as many comments as I do, so I think in his case it makes sense to just ignore them. If he read (or, even worse, responded to) them, he’d have no time for anything else.
4 0.14892946 1791 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-07-Scatterplot charades!
Introduction: What are the x and y-axes here ? P.S. Popeye nails it (see comments).
5 0.14542858 1897 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-13-When’s that next gamma-ray blast gonna come, already?
Introduction: Phil Plait writes : Earth May Have Been Hit by a Cosmic Blast 1200 Years Ago . . . this is nothing to panic about. If it happened at all, it was a long time ago, and unlikely to happen again for hundreds of thousands of years. This left me confused. If it really did happen 1200 years ago, basic statistics would suggest it would occur approximately once every 1200 years or so (within half an order of magnitude). So where does “hundreds of thousands of years” come from? I emailed astronomer David Hogg to see if I was missing something here, and he replied: Yeah, if we think this hit us 1200 years ago, we should imagine that this happens every few thousand years at least. Now that said, if there are *other* reasons for thinking it is exceedingly rare, then that would be a strong a priori argument against believing in the result. So you should either believe that it didn’t happen 1200 years ago, or else you should believe it will happen again in the next few thousan
6 0.13850413 2075 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-23-PubMed Commons: A system for commenting on articles in PubMed
7 0.13325678 2237 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-08-Disagreeing to disagree
8 0.12138087 1423 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-21-Optimizing software in C++
9 0.12066855 1965 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-02-My course this fall on l’analyse bayésienne de données
10 0.11748119 790 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-08-Blog in motion
11 0.1150161 2175 andrew gelman stats-2014-01-18-A course in sample surveys for political science
12 0.1121164 619 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-19-If a comment is flagged as spam, it will disappear forever
13 0.10982151 1168 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-14-The tabloids strike again
14 0.10756083 831 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-30-A Wikipedia riddle!
15 0.10437363 1185 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-26-A statistician’s rants and raves
16 0.10257102 1835 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-02-7 ways to separate errors from statistics
17 0.092605665 2279 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-02-Am I too negative?
18 0.091656618 1202 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-08-Between and within-Krugman correlation
19 0.090275303 1296 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-03-Google Translate for code, and an R help-list bot
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.082), (1, -0.044), (2, -0.052), (3, 0.03), (4, -0.009), (5, -0.024), (6, 0.041), (7, -0.002), (8, 0.055), (9, -0.052), (10, 0.043), (11, 0.022), (12, 0.071), (13, 0.048), (14, 0.058), (15, 0.066), (16, -0.036), (17, 0.014), (18, -0.038), (19, 0.028), (20, 0.036), (21, -0.003), (22, -0.018), (23, -0.04), (24, -0.023), (25, 0.071), (26, -0.012), (27, 0.075), (28, 0.043), (29, 0.001), (30, -0.067), (31, 0.033), (32, -0.033), (33, -0.036), (34, -0.078), (35, -0.008), (36, 0.057), (37, 0.141), (38, 0.079), (39, -0.079), (40, -0.078), (41, 0.032), (42, -0.018), (43, -0.076), (44, -0.025), (45, -0.09), (46, 0.011), (47, -0.089), (48, 0.009), (49, 0.038)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.99722266 1170 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-16-A previous discussion with Charles Murray about liberals, conservatives, and social class
Introduction: From 2.5 years ago . Read all the comments; the discussion is helpful.
2 0.78021145 1399 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-28-Life imitates blog
Introduction: I just noticed this from a couple years ago!
3 0.74358273 1994 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-22-“The comment section is open, but I’m not going to read them”
Introduction: That’s Tyler Cowen’s policy . I read almost all the comments here. I’m glad I read them, I think. Over the years, I’ve learned a lot of interesting things from the comments. Sometimes, though, I wish I hadn’t bothered. Cowen gets about 10 times as many comments as I do, so I think in his case it makes sense to just ignore them. If he read (or, even worse, responded to) them, he’d have no time for anything else.
4 0.68471992 831 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-30-A Wikipedia riddle!
Introduction: I was distinguished for over three years and now am renowned. For most of the past year and a half, though, I was neither. Who am I? First person who guesses the right answer in comments gets a free copy of Jenny Davidson’s book, “Breeding”–as soon as she sends it to me, as she promised a couple years ago! You’ll get an extra prize if you can express the answer in an indirect way, without using the person’s name or being too obvious about it but making the identification clear enough that I know you know the answer. P.S. Reading Wikipedia edits . . . that’s a new low in time-wasting!
5 0.66351926 1185 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-26-A statistician’s rants and raves
Introduction: Not from me, from Dean Foster , who maybe was in the same stochastic processes course with me, thirty years ago.
6 0.62045717 9 andrew gelman stats-2010-04-28-But it all goes to pay for gas, car insurance, and tolls on the turnpike
7 0.61281681 619 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-19-If a comment is flagged as spam, it will disappear forever
8 0.60322613 1222 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-20-5 books book
9 0.59468621 1791 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-07-Scatterplot charades!
10 0.58377177 817 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-23-New blog home
11 0.58343285 1168 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-14-The tabloids strike again
13 0.55971563 790 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-08-Blog in motion
14 0.55516958 1381 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-16-The Art of Fielding
15 0.54876411 1897 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-13-When’s that next gamma-ray blast gonna come, already?
16 0.54747874 1709 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-06-The fractal nature of scientific revolutions
17 0.5448752 876 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-28-Vaguely related to the coke-dumping story
18 0.54327989 786 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-04-Questions about quantum computing
19 0.53230011 240 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-29-ARM solutions
20 0.52355713 2075 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-23-PubMed Commons: A system for commenting on articles in PubMed
topicId topicWeight
[(24, 0.343), (99, 0.366)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
Introduction: Well put.
2 0.99693722 1224 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-21-Teaching velocity and acceleration
Introduction: David Hogg writes of teaching intro physics: The time derivative of velocity is acceleration, both vectors of course. But I [Hogg] was reminded in office hours today of just how hard it is to get across the idea that the velocity vector and the acceleration vector can point in totally different directions. And some students have trouble seeing this when a ballistic stone is going upwards along some (parabolic) arc, some have trouble seeing it when it is going down, and some have trouble seeing it at the top. That is, different students have very different problems visualizing the differences of the vectors over time. I wonder if it would help to use the business cycle as an example? When you’re at the top of the cycle, the position is high, the velocity is zero, and the acceleration is negative. And so on. Would that example work or would it just confuse things further because you still have to make the transition to physical motion (in which the dimensions are positions in
3 0.99418116 1999 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-27-Bayesian model averaging or fitting a larger model
Introduction: Nick Firoozye writes: I had a question about BMA [Bayesian model averaging] and model combinations in general, and direct it to you since they are a basic form of hierarchical model, albeit in the simplest of forms. I wanted to ask what the underlying assumptions are that could lead to BMA improving on a larger model. I know model combination is a topic of interest in the (frequentist) econometrics community (e.g., Bates & Granger, http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/3008764?uid=3738032&uid;=2&uid;=4&sid;=21101948653381) but at the time it was considered a bit of a puzzle. Perhaps small models combined outperform a big model due to standard errors, insufficient data, etc. But I haven’t seen much in way of Bayesian justification. In simplest terms, you might have a joint density P(Y,theta_1,theta_2) from which you could use the two marginals P(Y,theta_1) and P(Y,theta_2) to derive two separate forecasts. A BMA-er would do a weighted average of the two forecast densities, having p
4 0.99181575 197 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-10-The last great essayist?
Introduction: I recently read a bizarre article by Janet Malcolm on a murder trial in NYC. What threw me about the article was that the story was utterly commonplace (by the standards of today’s headlines): divorced mom kills ex-husband in a custody dispute over their four-year-old daughter. The only interesting features were (a) the wife was a doctor and the husband were a dentist, the sort of people you’d expect to sue rather than slay, and (b) the wife hired a hitman from within the insular immigrant community that she (and her husband) belonged to. But, really, neither of these was much of a twist. To add to the non-storyness of it all, there were no other suspects, the evidence against the wife and the hitman was overwhelming, and even the high-paid defense lawyers didn’t seem to be making much of an effort to convince anyone of their client’s innocents. (One of the closing arguments was that one aspect of the wife’s story was so ridiculous that it had to be true. In the lawyer’s wo
Introduction: Our discussion on data visualization continues. One one side are three statisticians–Antony Unwin, Kaiser Fung, and myself. We have been writing about the different goals served by information visualization and statistical graphics. On the other side are graphics experts (sorry for the imprecision, I don’t know exactly what these people do in their day jobs or how they are trained, and I don’t want to mislabel them) such as Robert Kosara and Jen Lowe , who seem a bit annoyed at how my colleagues and myself seem to follow the Tufte strategy of criticizing what we don’t understand. And on the third side are many (most?) academic statisticians, econometricians, etc., who don’t understand or respect graphs and seem to think of visualization as a toy that is unrelated to serious science or statistics. I’m not so interested in the third group right now–I tried to communicate with them in my big articles from 2003 and 2004 )–but I am concerned that our dialogue with the graphic
6 0.99138081 2247 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-14-The maximal information coefficient
7 0.99016035 278 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-15-Advice that might make sense for individuals but is negative-sum overall
10 0.9886387 1455 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-12-Probabilistic screening to get an approximate self-weighted sample
11 0.98740149 2143 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-22-The kluges of today are the textbook solutions of tomorrow.
12 0.98683012 1072 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-19-“The difference between . . .”: It’s not just p=.05 vs. p=.06
13 0.98601103 63 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-02-The problem of overestimation of group-level variance parameters
14 0.98490584 896 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-09-My homework success
same-blog 15 0.98460186 1170 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-16-A previous discussion with Charles Murray about liberals, conservatives, and social class
16 0.98427492 77 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-09-Sof[t]
17 0.98380613 953 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-11-Steve Jobs’s cancer and science-based medicine
18 0.98353863 85 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-14-Prior distribution for design effects
19 0.98308742 1757 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-11-My problem with the Lindley paradox
20 0.98300886 1421 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-19-Alexa, Maricel, and Marty: Three cellular automata who got on my nerves