andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2012 andrew_gelman_stats-2012-1203 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: Drew Linzer showed me this hilarious monochrome image:
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('linzer', 0.608), ('hilarious', 0.454), ('drew', 0.441), ('image', 0.345), ('showed', 0.332)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 1.0 1203 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-08-John Dalton’s Stroop test
Introduction: Drew Linzer showed me this hilarious monochrome image:
2 0.23466675 1241 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-02-Fixed effects and identification
Introduction: Tom Clark writes: Drew Linzer and I [Tom] have been working on a paper about the use of modeled (“random”) and unmodeled (“fixed”) effects. Not directly in response to the paper, but in conversations about the topic over the past few months, several people have said to us things to the effect of “I prefer fixed effects over random effects because I care about identification.” Neither Drew nor I has any idea what this comment is supposed to mean. Have you come across someone saying something like this? Do you have any thoughts about what these people could possibly mean? I want to respond to this concern when people raise it, but I have failed thus far to inquire what is meant and so do not know what to say. My reply: I have a “cultural” reply, which is that so-called fixed effects are thought to make fewer assumptions, and making fewer assumptions is considered a generally good thing that serious people do, and identification is considered a concern of serious people, so they g
3 0.11139712 1863 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-19-Prose is paragraphs, prose is sentences
Introduction: This isn’t quite right—poetry, too, can be in paragraph form (see Auden, for example, or Frost, or lots of other examples)—but Basbøll is on to something here. I’m reminded of Nicholson Baker’s hilarious “From the Index of First Lines,” which is truly the poetic counterpart to Basbøll’s argument in prose:
Introduction: Ben Hyde sends along this appealing image by Michael Paukner, which represents a nearly perfect distillation of “infographics”: Here are some of the comments on the linked page: Rather than redrawing the picture to make the lines more clear, I’d say: leave the graphic as is, and have a link to a set of statistical graphs that show where the different sorts of old trees are and what they look like. Let’s value the above image for its clean look and its clever Christmas-tree design, and once we have it, take advantage of viewers’ interest in the topic to show them more. P.S. See my comment below which I think further illuminates the appeal of this particular tree.
5 0.10125843 1756 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-10-He said he was sorry
Introduction: Yes, it can be done : Hereby I contact you to clarify the situation that occurred with the publication of the article entitled *** which was published in Volume 11, Issue 3 of *** and I made the mistake of declaring as an author. This chapter is a plagiarism of . . . I wish to express and acknowledge that I am solely responsible for this . . . I recognize the gravity of the offense committed, since there is no justification for so doing. Therefore, and as a sign of shame and regret I feel in this situation, I will publish this letter, in order to set an example for other researchers do not engage in a similar error. No more, and to please accept my apologies, Sincerely, *** P.S. Since we’re on Retraction Watch already, I’ll point you to this unrelated story featuring a hilarious photo of a fraudster, who in this case was a grad student in psychology who faked his data and “has agreed to submit to a three-year supervisory period for any work involving funding from the
6 0.096483812 603 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-07-Assumptions vs. conditions, part 2
7 0.094812475 1797 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-10-“Proposition and experiment”
8 0.06409099 252 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-02-R needs a good function to make line plots
9 0.062216144 2188 andrew gelman stats-2014-01-27-“Disappointed with your results? Boost your scientific paper”
10 0.054040104 324 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-07-Contest for developing an R package recommendation system
11 0.053832356 574 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-14-“The best data visualizations should stand on their own”? I don’t think so.
13 0.050192509 1264 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-14-Learning from failure
14 0.047275752 30 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-13-Trips to Cleveland
15 0.046060033 1494 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-13-Watching the sharks jump
16 0.044357762 910 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-15-Google Refine
17 0.043674815 588 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-24-In case you were wondering, here’s the price of milk
18 0.042196792 2083 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-31-Value-added modeling in education: Gaming the system by sending kids on a field trip at test time
19 0.041991785 1775 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-23-In which I disagree with John Maynard Keynes
20 0.040808111 293 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-23-Lowess is great
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.009), (1, -0.005), (2, -0.001), (3, 0.002), (4, 0.012), (5, -0.014), (6, -0.002), (7, -0.002), (8, -0.0), (9, -0.002), (10, -0.002), (11, -0.003), (12, 0.004), (13, -0.001), (14, 0.011), (15, -0.004), (16, -0.006), (17, 0.001), (18, -0.009), (19, 0.002), (20, -0.009), (21, 0.003), (22, -0.013), (23, -0.014), (24, 0.002), (25, -0.006), (26, -0.011), (27, 0.017), (28, 0.005), (29, 0.016), (30, 0.004), (31, -0.007), (32, -0.011), (33, 0.009), (34, 0.005), (35, -0.024), (36, -0.005), (37, -0.019), (38, 0.012), (39, -0.006), (40, 0.009), (41, -0.029), (42, 0.003), (43, 0.016), (44, -0.013), (45, 0.012), (46, -0.008), (47, -0.012), (48, -0.0), (49, -0.007)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.99385625 1203 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-08-John Dalton’s Stroop test
Introduction: Drew Linzer showed me this hilarious monochrome image:
2 0.46842894 1241 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-02-Fixed effects and identification
Introduction: Tom Clark writes: Drew Linzer and I [Tom] have been working on a paper about the use of modeled (“random”) and unmodeled (“fixed”) effects. Not directly in response to the paper, but in conversations about the topic over the past few months, several people have said to us things to the effect of “I prefer fixed effects over random effects because I care about identification.” Neither Drew nor I has any idea what this comment is supposed to mean. Have you come across someone saying something like this? Do you have any thoughts about what these people could possibly mean? I want to respond to this concern when people raise it, but I have failed thus far to inquire what is meant and so do not know what to say. My reply: I have a “cultural” reply, which is that so-called fixed effects are thought to make fewer assumptions, and making fewer assumptions is considered a generally good thing that serious people do, and identification is considered a concern of serious people, so they g
3 0.41545525 1127 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-18-The Fixie Bike Index
Introduction: Where are the fixed-gear bike riders? Rohin Dhar explains : At Priceonomics, in order to build our bicycle price guide, we measure what kind of used bikes people are trying to sell and the quantity sold in any city. By mining our database of 1.3 million bicycle listings, we can tell what are the largest markets for used bicycles, how the prices vary by region, and where people who prize fixed gear bikes live. Fixies (fixed gear bikes) are considered to be a strong indicator of hipsterness. For those unfamiliar, a fixed gear bike requires riding in a single gear and the only way to stop the bike is to pedal backwards to help skid the bike to a halt. You can’t “coast” on a fixie; when you are biking downhill, your pedals will keep moving so you better keep pedaling too. Because of the minimalism of this fixed gear system, the bikes tend to be aesthetically pleasing but somewhat challenging to ride. . . . In short, fixed gear bikes = hipsters, and New York boroug
4 0.41324052 467 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-14-Do we need an integrated Bayesian-likelihood inference?
Introduction: My recent article with Xian and Judith. In English. Interested readers can try to figure out which parts were written by each of the three authors (recognizing that each of us edited the whole thing).
5 0.40970305 224 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-22-Mister P gets married
Introduction: Jeff, Justin, and I write : Gay marriage is not going away as a highly emotional, contested issue. Proposition 8, the California ballot measure that bans same-sex marriage, has seen to that, as it winds its way through the federal courts. But perhaps the public has reached a turning point. And check out the (mildly) dynamic graphics. The picture below is ok but for the full effect you have to click through and play the movie.
6 0.40747854 190 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-07-Mister P makes the big jump from the New York Times to the Washington Post
8 0.40027177 443 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-02-Automating my graphics advice
9 0.39617839 2154 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-30-Bill Gates’s favorite graph of the year
10 0.38008437 1439 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-01-A book with a bunch of simple graphs
11 0.37399822 672 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-20-The R code for those time-use graphs
13 0.37296301 2199 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-04-Widening the goalposts in medical trials
14 0.37167549 1011 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-15-World record running times vs. distance
15 0.36865687 671 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-20-One more time-use graph
16 0.36450538 1233 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-27-Pushback against internet self-help gurus
17 0.36095729 1167 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-14-Extra babies on Valentine’s Day, fewer on Halloween?
18 0.35928214 1851 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-11-Actually, I have no problem with this graph
19 0.35665688 169 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-29-Say again?
20 0.35553035 1697 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-29-Where 36% of all boys end up nowadays
topicId topicWeight
[(26, 0.446), (53, 0.107), (88, 0.142)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.99650985 1203 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-08-John Dalton’s Stroop test
Introduction: Drew Linzer showed me this hilarious monochrome image:
2 0.33522713 1499 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-16-Uri Simonsohn is speaking at Columbia tomorrow (Mon)
Introduction: Noon in the stat dept (room 903 School of Social Work, at 122/Amsterdam). He’ll be talking about ways of finding fishy p-values. See here and here for background. This stuff is cool and important.
3 0.27779782 141 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-12-Dispute over counts of child deaths in Iraq due to sanctions
Introduction: Mike Spagat writes: Here is yet another debunking article I’ve written, this one in the latest issue of Significance. It shows the Lancet once again publishing spectacularly wrong information that has misinformed public discussion on a crucial issue with ongoing reverberations. For example, there is Tony Blair’s recent justification for the Iraq war offered in front of the Chilcot Inquiry in the UK quoted at the beginning of the paper. I haven’t had a chance to look at this one, but here’s a link to some related Spagat work.
4 0.19676347 413 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-14-Statistics of food consumption
Introduction: Visual Economics shows statistics on average food consumption in America: My brief feedback is that water is confounded with these results. They should have subtracted water content from the weight of all dietary items, as it inflates the proportion of milk, vegetable and fruit items that contain more water. They did that for soda (which is represented as sugar/corn syrup), amplifying the inconsistency. Time Magazine had a beautiful gallery that visualizes diets around the world in a more appealing way.
5 0.19044372 1879 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-01-Benford’s law and addresses
Introduction: One example we give to illustrate Benford’s law is the first digits of addresses. Javier Marquez Pena had a survey and, just for laffs, he looked the distribution of first digits: Cool—it really works! P.S. The y-axis shouldn’t go below zero, and I’d much prefer an L-type graphics box (par(bty=”l”)) rather than the square, but those are familiar problems with R defaults.
6 0.17548859 1331 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-19-Question 9 of my final exam for Design and Analysis of Sample Surveys
7 0.13588053 1174 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-18-Not as ugly as you look
8 0.12987871 1589 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-25-Life as a blogger: the emails just get weirder and weirder
9 0.12909512 1219 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-18-Tips on “great design” from . . . Microsoft!
11 0.10966692 1677 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-16-Greenland is one tough town
12 0.10784967 1856 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-14-GPstuff: Bayesian Modeling with Gaussian Processes
13 0.097180627 1802 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-14-Detecting predictability in complex ecosystems
14 0.096733339 290 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-22-Data Thief
15 0.093103901 1098 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-04-Bayesian Page Rank?
16 0.092455328 46 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-21-Careers, one-hit wonders, and an offer of a free book
17 0.091840915 1468 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-24-Multilevel modeling and instrumental variables
18 0.086127289 795 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-10-Aleks says this is the future of visualization
19 0.08376909 991 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-04-Insecure researchers aren’t sharing their data
20 0.081560306 1992 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-21-Workshop for Women in Machine Learning