andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2013 andrew_gelman_stats-2013-1727 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: Louis Mittel writes: Do you know why David Brooks has such a beef with data? My reply: I have no idea, but I’m happy that we’re now considered the establishment that he has to rebel against!
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 Louis Mittel writes: Do you know why David Brooks has such a beef with data? [sent-1, score-0.469]
2 My reply: I have no idea, but I’m happy that we’re now considered the establishment that he has to rebel against! [sent-2, score-1.162]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('rebel', 0.441), ('mittel', 0.441), ('beef', 0.398), ('establishment', 0.363), ('louis', 0.33), ('brooks', 0.275), ('considered', 0.18), ('happy', 0.178), ('david', 0.161), ('reply', 0.128), ('idea', 0.099), ('re', 0.079), ('know', 0.071), ('writes', 0.067), ('data', 0.06)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 1.0 1727 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-19-Beef with data
Introduction: Louis Mittel writes: Do you know why David Brooks has such a beef with data? My reply: I have no idea, but I’m happy that we’re now considered the establishment that he has to rebel against!
Introduction: I was thinking more about David Brooks’s anti-data column from yesterday, and I realized what is really bothering me. Brooks expresses skepticism about numbers, about the limitations of raw data, about the importance of human thinking. Fine, I agree with all of this, to some extent. But then Brooks turns around uses numbers and unquestioningly and uncritically (OK, not completely uncritically; see P.S. below). In a notorious recent case, Brooks wrote, in the context of college admissions: You’re going to want to argue with Unz’s article all the way along, especially for its narrow, math-test-driven view of merit. But it’s potentially ground-shifting. Unz’s other big point is that Jews are vastly overrepresented at elite universities and that Jewish achievement has collapsed. In the 1970s, for example, 40 percent of top scorers in the Math Olympiad had Jewish names. Now 2.5 percent do. But these numbers are incorrect, as I learned from a professor of oncology at the Univ
3 0.19543134 2259 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-22-Picking pennies in front of a steamroller: A parable comes to life
Introduction: From 2011: Chapter 1 On Sunday we were over on 125 St so I stopped by the Jamaican beef patties place but they were closed. Jesus Taco was next door so I went there instead. What a mistake! I don’t know what Masanao and Yu-Sung could’ve been thinking. Anyway, then I had Jamaican beef patties on the brain so I went by Monday afternoon and asked for 9: 3 spicy beef, 3 mild beef (for the kids), and 3 chicken (not the jerk chicken; Bob got those the other day and they didn’t impress me). I’m about to pay and then a bunch of people come in and start ordering. The woman behind the counter asks if I’m in a hurry, I ask why, she whispers, For the same price you can get a dozen. So I get two more spicy beef and a chicken. She whispers that I shouldn’t tell anyone. I can’t really figure out why I’m getting this special treatment. So I walk out of there with 12 patties. Total cost: $17.25. It’s a good deal: they’re small but not that small. Sure, I ate 6 of them, but I was h
4 0.18923528 512 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-12-Picking pennies in front of a steamroller: A parable comes to life
Introduction: Chapter 1 On Sunday we were over on 125 St so I stopped by the Jamaican beef patties place but they were closed. Jesus Taco was next door so I went there instead. What a mistake! I don’t know what Masanao and Yu-Sung could’ve been thinking. Anyway, then I had Jamaican beef patties on the brain so I went by Monday afternoon and asked for 9: 3 spicy beef, 3 mild beef (for the kids), and 3 chicken (not the jerk chicken; Bob got those the other day and they didn’t impress me). I’m about to pay and then a bunch of people come in and start ordering. The woman behind the counter asks if I’m in a hurry, I ask why, she whispers, For the same price you can get a dozen. So I get two more spicy beef and a chicken. She whispers that I shouldn’t tell anyone. I can’t really figure out why I’m getting this special treatment. So I walk out of there with 12 patties. Total cost: $17.25. It’s a good deal: they’re small but not that small. Sure, I ate 6 of them, but I was hungry. Chapt
5 0.18063906 928 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-27-Hey, look over here! Another rant!
Introduction: Bigshot establishment dude Peter Orszag thinks bigshot establishment dudes don’t have enough power. (Also politically related but not a rant: Joe McCarthy Versus Powerman and the Debt-Ceiling Destroyers, Part One. )
6 0.13425408 2280 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-03-As the boldest experiment in journalism history, you admit you made a mistake
8 0.1291385 2177 andrew gelman stats-2014-01-19-“The British amateur who debunked the mathematics of happiness”
9 0.12603135 1354 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-30-“I didn’t marry a horn, I married a man”
10 0.12154154 1025 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-24-Always check your evidence
11 0.11297634 1882 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-03-The statistical properties of smart chains (and referral chains more generally)
12 0.11043506 1271 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-20-Education could use some systematic evaluation
13 0.10807491 1587 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-21-Red state blue state, or, states and counties are not persons
14 0.092028424 744 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-03-Statistical methods for healthcare regulation: rating, screening and surveillance
15 0.078173965 1866 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-21-Recently in the sister blog
16 0.0711997 2107 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-20-NYT (non)-retraction watch
17 0.060942903 2337 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-18-Never back down: The culture of poverty and the culture of journalism
18 0.058107451 2269 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-27-Beyond the Valley of the Trolls
19 0.054168168 844 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-07-Update on the new Handbook of MCMC
20 0.054110795 1768 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-18-Mertz’s reply to Unz’s response to Mertz’s comments on Unz’s article
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.048), (1, -0.002), (2, -0.001), (3, 0.009), (4, 0.011), (5, 0.004), (6, 0.02), (7, 0.002), (8, -0.007), (9, 0.003), (10, -0.011), (11, 0.008), (12, -0.058), (13, 0.01), (14, 0.017), (15, 0.067), (16, -0.038), (17, -0.001), (18, 0.032), (19, 0.004), (20, -0.023), (21, -0.006), (22, 0.034), (23, 0.008), (24, -0.014), (25, 0.005), (26, 0.001), (27, -0.017), (28, 0.027), (29, 0.016), (30, 0.027), (31, 0.011), (32, 0.009), (33, -0.014), (34, -0.031), (35, 0.001), (36, -0.002), (37, 0.015), (38, 0.0), (39, 0.027), (40, 0.019), (41, 0.04), (42, -0.015), (43, -0.027), (44, -0.042), (45, 0.041), (46, 0.058), (47, -0.053), (48, 0.035), (49, -0.013)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.8894226 1727 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-19-Beef with data
Introduction: Louis Mittel writes: Do you know why David Brooks has such a beef with data? My reply: I have no idea, but I’m happy that we’re now considered the establishment that he has to rebel against!
Introduction: I was thinking more about David Brooks’s anti-data column from yesterday, and I realized what is really bothering me. Brooks expresses skepticism about numbers, about the limitations of raw data, about the importance of human thinking. Fine, I agree with all of this, to some extent. But then Brooks turns around uses numbers and unquestioningly and uncritically (OK, not completely uncritically; see P.S. below). In a notorious recent case, Brooks wrote, in the context of college admissions: You’re going to want to argue with Unz’s article all the way along, especially for its narrow, math-test-driven view of merit. But it’s potentially ground-shifting. Unz’s other big point is that Jews are vastly overrepresented at elite universities and that Jewish achievement has collapsed. In the 1970s, for example, 40 percent of top scorers in the Math Olympiad had Jewish names. Now 2.5 percent do. But these numbers are incorrect, as I learned from a professor of oncology at the Univ
Introduction: A Brooks op-ed in the New York Times (circulation approximately 1.5 million): People at the extremes are happier than political moderates. . . . none, it seems, are happier than the Tea Partiers . . . Jay Livingston on his blog (circulation approximately 0 (rounding to the nearest million)), giving data from the 2009-2010 General Social Survey, which is the usual place people turn to for population data on happiness of Americans: The GSS does not offer “bitter” or “Tea Party” as choices, but extreme conservatives are nearly three times as likely as others to be “not too happy.” Livingston reports that the sample size for “Extremely Conservative” here is 80. Thus the standard error for that green bar on the right is approx sqrt(0.3*0.7/80)=0.05. So how could Brooks have made such a mistake? I can think of two possibilities: 1. Brooks has some other data source that directly addresses the happiness of supporters of the Tea Party movement. 2. Brooks looked a
4 0.6412077 1768 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-18-Mertz’s reply to Unz’s response to Mertz’s comments on Unz’s article
Introduction: Here. And here’s the story so far: Ron Unz posted a long article on college admissions of Asians and Jews with some numbers and comparisons that made their way into some blogs (including here ) and also a David Brooks NYT column which was read by many people, including Janet Mertz, who’d done previous research on ethnic composition of high-end math students. Mertz contacted me (she’d earlier tried Brooks and others but received no helpful reply), and I posted her findings along with those of another correspondent. Unz then replied , motivating Mertz to write a seven-page document expanding on her earlier emails. Unz responded to that, characterizing Mertz as maybe “emotional” but not actually disputing any of her figures. Unz did, however, make the unconvincing (to me) implication that his original numbers were basically OK even in light of Mertz’s corrections. So Mertz responded once more . (There’s also a side discussion about women’s representation in m
5 0.61648506 2073 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-22-Ivy Jew update
Introduction: Nurit Baytch posted a document, A Critique of Ron Unz’s Article “The Myth of American Meritocracy” , that is relevant to an ongoing discussion we had on this blog. Baytch’s article begins: In “The Myth of American Meritocracy,” Ron Unz, the publisher of The American Conservative, claimed that Harvard discriminates against non-Jewish white and Asian students in favor of Jewish students. I [Baytch] shall demonstrate that Unz’s conclusion that Jews are over-admitted to Harvard was erroneous, as he relied on faulty assumptions and spurious data: Unz substantially overestimated the percentage of Jews at Harvard while grossly underestimating the percentage of Jews among high academic achievers, when, in fact, there is no discrepancy, as my analysis will show. In addition, Unz’s arguments have proven to be untenable in light of a recent survey of incoming Harvard freshmen conducted by The Harvard Crimson, which found that students who identified as Jewish reported a mean SAT score of 2289
6 0.59367728 1751 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-06-Janet Mertz’s response to “The Myth of American Meritocracy”
7 0.58382905 1743 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-28-Different modes of discourse
8 0.56772006 1025 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-24-Always check your evidence
10 0.52887875 2107 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-20-NYT (non)-retraction watch
11 0.50947767 1730 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-20-Unz on Unz
12 0.50270367 1271 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-20-Education could use some systematic evaluation
13 0.47879255 2259 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-22-Picking pennies in front of a steamroller: A parable comes to life
14 0.45806283 424 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-21-Data cleaning tool!
15 0.45606554 2280 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-03-As the boldest experiment in journalism history, you admit you made a mistake
16 0.45435455 512 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-12-Picking pennies in front of a steamroller: A parable comes to life
17 0.44649905 2307 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-27-Big Data…Big Deal? Maybe, if Used with Caution.
18 0.44165918 844 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-07-Update on the new Handbook of MCMC
19 0.43904889 1595 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-28-Should Harvard start admitting kids at random?
20 0.42135492 1587 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-21-Red state blue state, or, states and counties are not persons
topicId topicWeight
[(16, 0.108), (27, 0.371), (90, 0.096), (99, 0.2)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
1 0.94795132 1490 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-09-I’m still wondering . . .
Introduction: Why can’t I buy train and plane tickets through Amazon? That would be so much more convenient than the current system where I have to keep entering information into the damn forms over and over again.
same-blog 2 0.82723188 1727 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-19-Beef with data
Introduction: Louis Mittel writes: Do you know why David Brooks has such a beef with data? My reply: I have no idea, but I’m happy that we’re now considered the establishment that he has to rebel against!
3 0.81805515 802 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-13-Super Sam Fuld Needs Your Help (with Foul Ball stats)
Introduction: I was pleasantly surprised to have my recreational reading about baseball in the New Yorker interrupted by a digression on statistics. Sam Fuld of the Tampa Bay Rays, was the subjet of a Ben McGrath profile in the 4 July 2011 issue of the New Yorker , in an article titled Super Sam . After quoting a minor-league trainer who described Fuld as “a bit of a geek” (who isn’t these days?), McGrath gets into that lovely New Yorker detail: One could have pointed out the more persuasive and telling examples, such as the fact that in 2005, after his first pro season, with the Class-A Peoria Chiefs, Fuld applied for a fall internship with Stats, Inc., the research firm that supplies broadcasters with much of the data anad analysis that you hear in sports telecasts. After a description of what they had him doing, reviewing footage of games and cataloguing, he said “I thought, They have a stat for everything, but they don’t have any stats regarding foul balls.” Fuld’s
4 0.76295888 347 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-17-Getting arm and lme4 running on the Mac
Introduction: Our “arm” package in R requires Doug Bates’s “lme4″ which fits multilevel models. lme4 is currently having some problems on the Mac. But installation on the Mac can be done; it just takes a bit of work. I have two sets of instructions below. From Yu-Sung: If you have MAC OS DVD, you should install developer X code packages from it. Otherwise, install them from here . After this, do the following in R: install.packages(“lme4″, type = “source”) Then you will have lme4 in R and you can install arm without a problem. And, from David Ozonoff: I installed the lme4 package via the Package Installer but this didn’t work, of course. I then installed, via this link , gfortran which seemed to put the libraries in the right place (I had earlier installed via Fink the gcc42 compiler, so I’m not sure if this is required or not). I then ran, in R, this: install.packages(c(“Matrix”,”lme4″), repos=”http://R-Forge.R-project.org”) This does not appear to work since it wi
Introduction: Someone passed on to a message from his university library announcing that the journal “Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics” is no longer free. Librarians have to decide what to do, so I thought I’d offer the following consumer guide: Wiley Computational Statistics journal Wikipedia Frequency 6 issues per year Continuously updated Includes articles from Wikipedia? Yes Yes Cites the Wikipedia sources it uses? No Yes Edited by recipient of ASA Founders Award? Yes No Articles are subject to rigorous review? No Yes Errors, when discovered, get fixed? No Yes Number of vertices in n-dimensional hypercube? 2n 2 n Easy access to Brady Bunch trivia? No Yes Cost (North America) $1400-$2800 $0 Cost (UK) £986-£1972 £0 Cost (Europe) €1213-€2426 €0 The choice seems pretty clear to me! It’s funny for the Wiley journal to start charging now
6 0.71911967 1255 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-10-Amtrak sucks
7 0.70582604 173 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-31-Editing and clutch hitting
8 0.69130284 134 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-08-“What do you think about curved lines connecting discrete data-points?”
9 0.66008127 1472 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-28-Migrating from dot to underscore
10 0.65442538 465 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-13-$3M health care prediction challenge
11 0.65297627 343 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-15-?
12 0.65063 708 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-12-Improvement of 5 MPG: how many more auto deaths?
13 0.62188268 3 andrew gelman stats-2010-04-26-Bayes in the news…in a somewhat frustrating way
15 0.61393476 1982 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-15-Blaming scientific fraud on the Kuhnians
16 0.60117513 1235 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-29-I’m looking for a quadrille notebook with faint lines
17 0.59820622 967 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-20-Picking on Gregg Easterbrook
18 0.59063411 2079 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-27-Uncompressing the concept of compressed sensing
19 0.58663952 1238 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-31-Dispute about ethics of data sharing
20 0.58095926 1113 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-11-Toshiro Kageyama on professionalism