andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2012 andrew_gelman_stats-2012-1380 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: I sent the following email to Thomas Basbøll: I read this: http://secondlanguage.blogspot.com/p/writing-coach.html and was reminded of this: http://andrewgelman.com/2011/10/could-i-use-a-statistics-coach/ He replied: Which reminds me of this http://secondlanguage.blogspot.com/2011/10/teacher-or-coach.html We seem to be approaching some sort of Platonic ideal in which we can conduct an entire conversation from links to our previous writings. Just like that joke about the roomful of comedians who refer to jokes by their numbers.
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 I sent the following email to Thomas Basbøll: I read this: http://secondlanguage. [sent-1, score-0.46]
2 html and was reminded of this: http://andrewgelman. [sent-4, score-0.174]
3 com/2011/10/could-i-use-a-statistics-coach/ He replied: Which reminds me of this http://secondlanguage. [sent-5, score-0.171]
4 html We seem to be approaching some sort of Platonic ideal in which we can conduct an entire conversation from links to our previous writings. [sent-8, score-1.546]
5 Just like that joke about the roomful of comedians who refer to jokes by their numbers. [sent-9, score-1.005]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('http', 0.469), ('roomful', 0.303), ('approaching', 0.294), ('jokes', 0.256), ('conduct', 0.226), ('basb', 0.211), ('joke', 0.21), ('refer', 0.198), ('conversation', 0.195), ('ideal', 0.191), ('thomas', 0.18), ('reminded', 0.174), ('reminds', 0.171), ('replied', 0.162), ('links', 0.159), ('entire', 0.157), ('previous', 0.153), ('email', 0.143), ('sent', 0.136), ('numbers', 0.12), ('following', 0.091), ('seem', 0.091), ('read', 0.09), ('sort', 0.08), ('ll', 0.079), ('like', 0.038)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.99999994 1380 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-15-Coaching, teaching, and writing
Introduction: I sent the following email to Thomas Basbøll: I read this: http://secondlanguage.blogspot.com/p/writing-coach.html and was reminded of this: http://andrewgelman.com/2011/10/could-i-use-a-statistics-coach/ He replied: Which reminds me of this http://secondlanguage.blogspot.com/2011/10/teacher-or-coach.html We seem to be approaching some sort of Platonic ideal in which we can conduct an entire conversation from links to our previous writings. Just like that joke about the roomful of comedians who refer to jokes by their numbers.
2 0.16297191 2314 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-01-Heller, Heller, and Gorfine on univariate and multivariate information measures
Introduction: Malka Gorfine writes: We noticed that the important topic of association measures and tests came up again in your blog, and we have few comments in this regard. It is useful to distinguish between the univariate and multivariate methods. A consistent multivariate method can recognise dependence between two vectors of random variables, while a univariate method can only loop over pairs of components and check for dependency between them. There are very few consistent multivariate methods. To the best of our knowledge there are three practical methods: 1) HSIC by Gretton et al. (http://www.gatsby.ucl.ac.uk/~gretton/papers/GreBouSmoSch05.pdf) 2) dcov by Szekely et al. (http://projecteuclid.org/euclid.aoas/1267453933) 3) A method we introduced in Heller et al (Biometrika, 2013, 503—510, http://biomet.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/12/04/biomet.ass070.full.pdf+html, and an R package, HHG, is available as well http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/HHG/index.html). A
3 0.13667463 1904 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-18-Job opening! Come work with us!
Introduction: Postdoctoral position in statistical modeling of social networks A full-time postdoctoral position is available beginning Fall 2014 in the research group of Tian Zheng and Andrew Gelman working on statistical analysis and modeling of social network data, in close cooperation with our experimental collaborators. Four key papers of this project so far are: http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/research/published/overdisp_final.pdf http://nersp.osg.ufl.edu/~ufruss/documents/mccormick_salganik_zheng10.pdf http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/research/published/DiPreteetal.pdf http://arxiv.org/pdf/1301.2473.pdf Requirements: The work is highly interdisciplinary, and applicants must have strong statistical and computational skills. Social science research skills are preferred but not necessary. Preferred educational background is a PhD in statistics, computer science, political science, sociology, or a related field. Expertise in Bayesian modeling and computing is required. Prev
4 0.12495755 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:
5 0.12159507 1269 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-19-Believe your models (up to the point that you abandon them)
Introduction: In a discussion of his variant of the write-a-thousand-words-a-day strategy (as he puts it, “a system for the production of academic results in writing”), Thomas Basbøll writes : Believe the claims you are making. That is, confine yourself to making claims you believe. I always emphasize this when I [Basbøll] define knowledge as “justified, true belief”. . . . I think if there is one sure way to undermine your sense of your own genius it is to begin to say things you know to be publishable without being sure they are true. Or even things you know to be “true” but don’t understand well enough to believe. He points out that this is not so easy: In times when there are strong orthodoxies it can sometimes be difficult to know what to believe. Or, rather, it is all too easy to know what to believe (what the “right belief” is). It is therefore difficult to stick to statements of one’s own belief. I sometimes worry that our universities, which are systems of formal education and for
6 0.11936001 503 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-04-Clarity on my email policy
7 0.1183912 1630 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-18-Postdoc positions at Microsoft Research – NYC
9 0.10487518 2250 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-16-“I have no idea who Catalina Garcia is, but she makes a decent ruler”
10 0.104372 1175 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-19-Factual – a new place to find data
11 0.10289163 2199 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-04-Widening the goalposts in medical trials
13 0.095043749 1924 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-03-Kuhn, 1-f noise, and the fractal nature of scientific revolutions
14 0.092986561 1658 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-07-Free advice from an academic writing coach!
15 0.092615172 2213 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-16-There’s no need for you to read this one
16 0.08819972 1588 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-23-No one knows what it’s like to be the bad man
17 0.082473017 1922 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-02-They want me to send them free material and pay for the privilege
18 0.080019586 1240 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-02-Blogads update
19 0.079944968 1422 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-20-Likelihood thresholds and decisions
20 0.079389274 1428 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-25-The problem with realistic advice?
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.071), (1, -0.038), (2, -0.05), (3, 0.005), (4, 0.021), (5, 0.026), (6, 0.013), (7, -0.043), (8, -0.001), (9, -0.013), (10, 0.006), (11, -0.026), (12, 0.053), (13, -0.006), (14, -0.024), (15, 0.065), (16, 0.005), (17, -0.029), (18, -0.017), (19, -0.002), (20, 0.029), (21, -0.007), (22, 0.04), (23, -0.033), (24, -0.001), (25, 0.02), (26, 0.066), (27, 0.044), (28, 0.014), (29, 0.036), (30, 0.017), (31, 0.036), (32, -0.054), (33, 0.046), (34, 0.044), (35, -0.034), (36, -0.022), (37, -0.038), (38, 0.034), (39, -0.038), (40, 0.051), (41, -0.0), (42, 0.032), (43, 0.01), (44, 0.008), (45, -0.048), (46, 0.018), (47, -0.075), (48, -0.047), (49, 0.008)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.9895494 1380 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-15-Coaching, teaching, and writing
Introduction: I sent the following email to Thomas Basbøll: I read this: http://secondlanguage.blogspot.com/p/writing-coach.html and was reminded of this: http://andrewgelman.com/2011/10/could-i-use-a-statistics-coach/ He replied: Which reminds me of this http://secondlanguage.blogspot.com/2011/10/teacher-or-coach.html We seem to be approaching some sort of Platonic ideal in which we can conduct an entire conversation from links to our previous writings. Just like that joke about the roomful of comedians who refer to jokes by their numbers.
2 0.63660353 1240 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-02-Blogads update
Introduction: A few months ago I reported on someone who wanted to insert text links into the blog. I asked her how much they would pay and got no answer. Yesterday, though, I received this reply: Hello Andrew, I am sorry for the delay in getting back to you. I’d like to make a proposal for your site. Please refer below. We would like to place a simple text link ad on page http://andrewgelman.com/2011/07/super_sam_fuld/ to link to *** with the key phrase ***. We will incorporate the key phrase into a sentence so it would read well. Rest assured it won’t sound obnoxious or advertorial. We will then process the final text link code as soon as you agree to our proposal. We can offer you $200 for this with the assumption that you will keep the link “live” on that page for 12 months or longer if you prefer. Please get back to us with a quick reply on your thoughts on this and include your Paypal ID for payment process. Hoping for a positive response from you. I wrote back: Hi,
3 0.61931819 2213 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-16-There’s no need for you to read this one
Introduction: I had an email exchange with Patrick Steigler the other day that amused me, so I’ll share it with you. Steigler started with the subject line “Taleb and STDEV vs. MAD” and the message: I came across http://www.edge.org/response-detail/25401 and was wondering what your thoughts on the issue might be. My reply: How come they never ask me for my opinions in these surveys? Steigler: Maybe you need to write a book of aphorisms. me: There’s this: http://andrewgelman.com/2009/05/24/handy_statistic/ and then this, which some students collected from a course I taught: http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/book/gelman_quotes.pdf Steigler: So, what would you opinion be on the scientific idea that is ready for retirement? me: I guess it’s a good thing they didn’t ask me! Steigler: How about the retirement of p value < .05 for significance? me: Yeah, but that’s too easy. It’s like if someone asks for a pop music recommendation and you say The Beatles. Steigler: Tru
4 0.59720546 1338 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-23-Advice on writing research articles
Introduction: From a few years ago : Both the papers sent to me appear to have strong research results. Now that the research has been done, I’d recommend rewriting both articles from scratch , using the following template: 1. Start with the conclusions. Write a couple pages on what you’ve found and what you recommend. In writing these conclusions, you should also be writing some of the introduction, in that you’ll need to give enough background so that general readers can understand what you’re talking about and why they should care. But you want to start with the conclusions, because that will determine what sort of background information you’ll need to give. 2. Now step back. What is the principal evidence for your conclusions? Make some graphs and pull out some key numbers that represent your research findings which back up your claims. 3. Back one more step, now. What are the methods and data you used to obtain your research findings. 4. Now go back and write the literature review
5 0.59434718 1080 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-24-Latest in blog advertising
Introduction: I received the following message from “Patricia Lopez” of “Premium Link Ads”: Hello, I am interested in placing a text link on your page: http://andrewgelman.com/2011/07/super_sam_fuld/. The link would point to a page on a website that is relevant to your page and may be useful to your site visitors. We would be happy to compensate you for your time if it is something we are able to work out. The best way to reach me is through a direct response to this email. This will help me get back to you about the right link request. Please let me know if you are interested, and if not thanks for your time. Thanks. Usually I just ignore these, but after our recent discussion I decided to reply. I wrote: How much do you pay? But no answer. I wonder what’s going on? I mean, why bother sending the email in the first place if you’re not going to follow up?
6 0.59373969 1922 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-02-They want me to send them free material and pay for the privilege
7 0.59219551 1618 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-11-The consulting biz
8 0.58733356 1573 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-11-Incredibly strange spam
9 0.58115131 343 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-15-?
11 0.57284743 880 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-30-Annals of spam
12 0.56916726 2324 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-07-Once more on nonparametric measures of mutual information
13 0.5688374 2148 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-25-Spam!
14 0.56350029 2172 andrew gelman stats-2014-01-14-Advice on writing research articles
15 0.56101185 1306 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-07-Lists of Note and Letters of Note
16 0.5508492 282 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-17-I can’t escape it
17 0.5504604 866 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-23-Participate in a research project on combining information for prediction
18 0.54801238 1589 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-25-Life as a blogger: the emails just get weirder and weirder
19 0.54793751 332 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-10-Proposed new section of the American Statistical Association on Imaging Sciences
20 0.54210627 503 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-04-Clarity on my email policy
topicId topicWeight
[(15, 0.034), (16, 0.105), (24, 0.083), (25, 0.056), (35, 0.054), (41, 0.042), (53, 0.077), (59, 0.112), (99, 0.272)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.97612 1380 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-15-Coaching, teaching, and writing
Introduction: I sent the following email to Thomas Basbøll: I read this: http://secondlanguage.blogspot.com/p/writing-coach.html and was reminded of this: http://andrewgelman.com/2011/10/could-i-use-a-statistics-coach/ He replied: Which reminds me of this http://secondlanguage.blogspot.com/2011/10/teacher-or-coach.html We seem to be approaching some sort of Platonic ideal in which we can conduct an entire conversation from links to our previous writings. Just like that joke about the roomful of comedians who refer to jokes by their numbers.
2 0.92720318 763 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-13-Inventor of Connect Four dies at 91
Introduction: Obit here . I think I have a cousin with the same last name as this guy, so maybe we’re related by marriage in some way. (By that standard we’re also related to Marge Simpson and, I seem to recall, the guy who wrote the scripts for Dark Shadows.)
3 0.92540324 34 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-14-Non-academic writings on literature
Introduction: Jenny writes : The Possessed made me [Jenny] think about an interesting workshop-style class I’d like to teach, which would be an undergraduate seminar for students who wanted to find out non-academic ways of writing seriously about literature. The syllabus would include some essays from this book, Geoff Dyer’s Out of Sheer Rage, Jonathan Coe’s Like a Fiery Elephant – and what else? I agree with the commenters that this would be a great class, but . . . I’m confused on the premise. Isn’t there just a huge, huge amount of excellent serious non-academic writing about literature? George Orwell, Mark Twain, Bernard Shaw, T. S. Eliot (if you like that sort of thing), Anthony Burgess , Mary McCarthy (I think you’d call her nonacademic even though she taught the occasional college course), G. K. Chesterton , etc etc etc? Teaching a course about academic ways of writing seriously about literature would seem much tougher to me.
Introduction: Someone points me to this report from Tilburg University on disgraced psychology researcher Diederik Stapel. The reports includes bits like this: When the fraud was first discovered, limiting the harm it caused for the victims was a matter of urgency. This was particularly the case for Mr Stapel’s former PhD students and postdoctoral researchers . . . However, the Committees were of the opinion that the main bulk of the work had not yet even started. . . . Journal publications can often leave traces that reach far into and even beyond scientific disciplines. The self-cleansing character of science calls for fraudulent publications to be withdrawn and no longer to proliferate within the literature. In addition, based on their initial impressions, the Committees believed that there were other serious issues within Mr Stapel’s publications . . . This brought into the spotlight a research culture in which this sloppy science, alongside out-and-out fraud, was able to remain undetected
5 0.91253424 229 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-24-Bizarre twisty argument about medical diagnostic tests
Introduction: My cobloggers sometimes write about “Politics Everywhere.” Here’s an example of a political writer taking something that’s not particularly political and trying to twist it into a political context. Perhaps the title should be “political journalism everywhere”. Michael Kinsley writes : Scientists have discovered a spinal fluid test that can predict with 100 percent accuracy whether people who already have memory loss are going to develop full-fledged Alzheimer’s disease. They apparently don’t know whether this test works for people with no memory problems yet, but reading between the lines of the report in the New York Times August 10, it sounds as if they believe it will. . . . This is truly the apple of knowledge: a test that can be given to physically and mentally healthy people in the prime of life, which can identify with perfect accuracy which ones are slowly going to lose their mental capabilities. If your first instinct is, “We should outlaw this test” or at lea
6 0.91241372 517 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-14-Bayes in China update
7 0.90576905 1764 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-15-How do I make my graphs?
8 0.90065658 199 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-11-Note to semi-spammers
9 0.90024465 766 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-14-Last Wegman post (for now)
10 0.89921516 853 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-14-Preferential admissions for children of elite colleges
11 0.89756858 2107 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-20-NYT (non)-retraction watch
12 0.89454961 214 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-17-Probability-processing hardware
13 0.89357549 771 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-16-30 days of statistics
14 0.89269185 1190 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-29-Why “Why”?
15 0.89233673 1861 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-17-Where do theories come from?
16 0.88846254 2233 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-04-Literal vs. rhetorical
17 0.88831234 1408 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-07-Not much difference between communicating to self and communicating to others
18 0.88818794 499 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-03-5 books
20 0.88772106 1453 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-10-Quotes from me!