andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2013 andrew_gelman_stats-2013-1847 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: Gary Marcus writes , An algorithm that is good at chess won’t help parsing sentences, and one that parses sentences likely won’t be much help playing chess. That is soooo true. I’m excellent at parsing sentences but I’m not so great at chess. And, worse than that, my chess ability seems to be declining from year to year. Which reminds me: I recently read Frank Brady’s much lauded Endgame , a biography of Bobby Fischer. The first few chapters were great, not just the Cinderella story of his steps to the world championship, but also the background on his childhood and the stories of the games and tournaments that he lost along the way. But after Fischer beats Spassky in 1972, the book just dies. Brady has chapter after chapter on Fisher’s life, his paranoia, his girlfriends, his travels. But, really, after the chess is over, it’s just sad and kind of boring. I’d much rather have had twice as much detail on the first part of the life and then had the post-1972 era compr
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 Gary Marcus writes , An algorithm that is good at chess won’t help parsing sentences, and one that parses sentences likely won’t be much help playing chess. [sent-1, score-0.943]
2 I’m excellent at parsing sentences but I’m not so great at chess. [sent-3, score-0.377]
3 And, worse than that, my chess ability seems to be declining from year to year. [sent-4, score-0.438]
4 Which reminds me: I recently read Frank Brady’s much lauded Endgame , a biography of Bobby Fischer. [sent-5, score-0.258]
5 The first few chapters were great, not just the Cinderella story of his steps to the world championship, but also the background on his childhood and the stories of the games and tournaments that he lost along the way. [sent-6, score-0.582]
6 But after Fischer beats Spassky in 1972, the book just dies. [sent-7, score-0.186]
7 Brady has chapter after chapter on Fisher’s life, his paranoia, his girlfriends, his travels. [sent-8, score-0.17]
8 But, really, after the chess is over, it’s just sad and kind of boring. [sent-9, score-0.42]
9 I’d much rather have had twice as much detail on the first part of the life and then had the post-1972 era compressed into a single chapter. [sent-10, score-0.488]
10 I mean, sure, I respect that Brady wanted to tell the full life story, and I’m not telling him how he should’ve written his book, I’m just giving my reactions. [sent-11, score-0.193]
11 Also, I would’ve liked more information on the games: what was the amazing set of moves that Fischer did in the so-called Game of the Century, what happened in some of the games he lost, and so on. [sent-12, score-0.533]
12 In an afterword, Brady writes that he decided not to include any games so as to make the book more accessible. [sent-13, score-0.408]
13 What I wonder is, how many readers are there like me, who enjoy chess, could understand a diagram and some discussion of what these amazing plays were, even if we couldn’t follow an entire game written on the page or have the patience to play one out on the board. [sent-14, score-0.727]
14 I wouldn’t have gotten much out of transcripts of chess games, but a few diagrams and discussions of key moments, that would’ve made the book a lot more interesting to me. [sent-15, score-0.792]
15 After Kasparov beat Karpov in the final game of their tournament—the game where both players knew that Kasparov had to win , that a draw wouldn’t be enough—I clipped the game out of the newspaper and later played it out with my dad. [sent-18, score-0.98]
16 To my ignorant eyes, there was no single point where I could spot a mistake by Karpov. [sent-20, score-0.231]
17 Kasparov just gradually and imperceptibly got to a winning position. [sent-21, score-0.066]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('chess', 0.359), ('brady', 0.339), ('games', 0.303), ('kasparov', 0.272), ('game', 0.25), ('parsing', 0.189), ('sentences', 0.188), ('amazing', 0.164), ('fischer', 0.14), ('life', 0.12), ('lost', 0.107), ('book', 0.105), ('bobby', 0.1), ('clipped', 0.1), ('lauded', 0.1), ('tournaments', 0.1), ('transcripts', 0.1), ('endgame', 0.095), ('diagram', 0.095), ('championship', 0.091), ('diagrams', 0.087), ('chapter', 0.085), ('ignorant', 0.085), ('soooo', 0.085), ('beats', 0.081), ('biography', 0.081), ('tournament', 0.081), ('declining', 0.079), ('marcus', 0.079), ('compressed', 0.078), ('patience', 0.078), ('much', 0.077), ('single', 0.074), ('written', 0.073), ('won', 0.073), ('spot', 0.072), ('childhood', 0.072), ('wouldn', 0.07), ('moments', 0.07), ('eyes', 0.069), ('plays', 0.067), ('beat', 0.067), ('moves', 0.066), ('gradually', 0.066), ('help', 0.065), ('gotten', 0.064), ('played', 0.063), ('era', 0.062), ('fisher', 0.062), ('sad', 0.061)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.99999982 1847 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-08-Of parsing and chess
Introduction: Gary Marcus writes , An algorithm that is good at chess won’t help parsing sentences, and one that parses sentences likely won’t be much help playing chess. That is soooo true. I’m excellent at parsing sentences but I’m not so great at chess. And, worse than that, my chess ability seems to be declining from year to year. Which reminds me: I recently read Frank Brady’s much lauded Endgame , a biography of Bobby Fischer. The first few chapters were great, not just the Cinderella story of his steps to the world championship, but also the background on his childhood and the stories of the games and tournaments that he lost along the way. But after Fischer beats Spassky in 1972, the book just dies. Brady has chapter after chapter on Fisher’s life, his paranoia, his girlfriends, his travels. But, really, after the chess is over, it’s just sad and kind of boring. I’d much rather have had twice as much detail on the first part of the life and then had the post-1972 era compr
2 0.31632185 615 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-16-Chess vs. checkers
Introduction: Mark Palko writes : Chess derives most of its complexity through differentiated pieces; with checkers the complexity comes from the interaction between pieces. The result is a series of elegant graph problems where the viable paths change with each move of your opponent. To draw an analogy with chess, imagine if moving your knight could allow your opponent’s bishop to move like a rook. Add to that the potential for traps and manipulation that come with forced capture and you have one of the most remarkable games of all time. . . . It’s not unusual to hear masters of both chess and checkers (draughts) to admit that they prefer the latter. So why does chess get all the respect? Why do you never see a criminal mastermind or a Bond villain playing in a checkers tournament? Part of the problem is that we learn the game as children so we tend to think of it as a children’s game. We focus on how simple the rules are and miss how much complexity and subtlety you can get out of those ru
3 0.30635095 2105 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-18-What’s my Kasparov number?
Introduction: A colleague writes: Personally my Kasparov number is two: I beat ** in a regular tournament game, and ** beat Kasparov! That’s pretty impressive, especially given that I didn’t know this guy played chess at all! Anyway, this got me thinking, what’s my Kasparov number? OK, that’s easy. I beat Magnus Carlsen the other day when he was passing through town on vacation, Carlsen beat Anand, . . . OK, just kidding. What is my Kasparov number, though? Note that the definition, unlike that of the Erdos or Bacon numbers, is asymmetric: it has to be that I had a victory over person 1, and person 1 had a victory over person 2, etc., and ultimately person N-1 had a victory over Kasparov. The games don’t have to be in time order, they just all have to be victories. And we’ll further require that the games all be played after childhood and before senility (i.e., it doesn’t count if I happened to play someone who happens to be a cousin of some grandmaster whom he beat when they were b
4 0.26175281 1473 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-28-Turing chess run update
Introduction: In honor of the Olympics , I got my butt over to the park and played run-around-the-house chess for the first time ever. As was discussed in the comments thread awhile ago , there seem to be three possible ways to play Turing chess: 1. You make your move and run around the house. The other player has to move before you return. Once you sit down to the table, the other player runs around the house. Then you have to move, etc. You lose if you are checkmated or if you fail to move before your opponent returns to his chair. 2. You make your move and run around the house. The other player has to move before you return, but he does not have to wait until you return to start running. He can start running once he’s moved. Then when you get back you have to move before he gets back, but you can start to run once you’ve moved, etc. 3. You make your move and run around the house. The other player takes as long as he wants and makes his move, then he runs. When you return, yo
5 0.26006567 1638 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-25-Diving chess
Introduction: Knowing of my interest in Turing run-around-the-house chess , David Lockhart points me to this : Diving Chess is a chess variant, which is played in a swimming pool. Instead of using chess clocks, each player must submerge themselves underwater during their turn, only to resurface when they are ready to make a move. Players must make a move within 5 seconds of resurfacing (they will receive a warning if not, and three warnings will result in a forfeit). Diving Chess was invented by American Chess Master Etan Ilfeld; the very first exhibition game took place between Ilfeld and former British Chess Champion William Hartston at the Thirdspace gym in Soho on August 2nd, 2011. Hartston won the match which lasted almost two hours such that each player was underwater for an entire hour.
6 0.25566185 218 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-20-I think you knew this already
7 0.22734594 1818 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-22-Goal: Rules for Turing chess
8 0.21224913 881 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-30-Rickey Henderson and Peter Angelos, together again
10 0.14988805 613 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-15-Gay-married state senator shot down gay marriage
11 0.14009252 1467 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-23-The pinch-hitter syndrome again
12 0.1323548 29 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-12-Probability of successive wins in baseball
13 0.12300571 982 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-30-“There’s at least as much as an 80 percent chance . . .”
14 0.1213647 216 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-18-More forecasting competitions
15 0.11748198 1899 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-14-Turing chess tournament!
16 0.11489145 2262 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-23-Win probabilities during a sporting event
17 0.1086119 178 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-03-(Partisan) visualization of health care legislation
19 0.098523341 2098 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-12-Plaig!
20 0.095122606 813 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-21-Scrabble!
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.123), (1, -0.062), (2, -0.026), (3, 0.071), (4, 0.025), (5, 0.003), (6, 0.079), (7, 0.011), (8, 0.083), (9, -0.011), (10, 0.02), (11, -0.005), (12, -0.003), (13, -0.04), (14, 0.023), (15, -0.018), (16, 0.012), (17, -0.018), (18, 0.077), (19, -0.063), (20, -0.063), (21, 0.091), (22, 0.013), (23, 0.087), (24, 0.061), (25, 0.078), (26, 0.04), (27, 0.127), (28, -0.044), (29, -0.213), (30, 0.046), (31, -0.178), (32, -0.034), (33, 0.059), (34, 0.066), (35, -0.023), (36, -0.05), (37, 0.006), (38, 0.086), (39, 0.126), (40, -0.057), (41, 0.05), (42, 0.073), (43, -0.011), (44, 0.034), (45, -0.124), (46, 0.07), (47, 0.005), (48, -0.016), (49, 0.051)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.9544099 1847 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-08-Of parsing and chess
Introduction: Gary Marcus writes , An algorithm that is good at chess won’t help parsing sentences, and one that parses sentences likely won’t be much help playing chess. That is soooo true. I’m excellent at parsing sentences but I’m not so great at chess. And, worse than that, my chess ability seems to be declining from year to year. Which reminds me: I recently read Frank Brady’s much lauded Endgame , a biography of Bobby Fischer. The first few chapters were great, not just the Cinderella story of his steps to the world championship, but also the background on his childhood and the stories of the games and tournaments that he lost along the way. But after Fischer beats Spassky in 1972, the book just dies. Brady has chapter after chapter on Fisher’s life, his paranoia, his girlfriends, his travels. But, really, after the chess is over, it’s just sad and kind of boring. I’d much rather have had twice as much detail on the first part of the life and then had the post-1972 era compr
2 0.91003722 615 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-16-Chess vs. checkers
Introduction: Mark Palko writes : Chess derives most of its complexity through differentiated pieces; with checkers the complexity comes from the interaction between pieces. The result is a series of elegant graph problems where the viable paths change with each move of your opponent. To draw an analogy with chess, imagine if moving your knight could allow your opponent’s bishop to move like a rook. Add to that the potential for traps and manipulation that come with forced capture and you have one of the most remarkable games of all time. . . . It’s not unusual to hear masters of both chess and checkers (draughts) to admit that they prefer the latter. So why does chess get all the respect? Why do you never see a criminal mastermind or a Bond villain playing in a checkers tournament? Part of the problem is that we learn the game as children so we tend to think of it as a children’s game. We focus on how simple the rules are and miss how much complexity and subtlety you can get out of those ru
3 0.90528941 1638 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-25-Diving chess
Introduction: Knowing of my interest in Turing run-around-the-house chess , David Lockhart points me to this : Diving Chess is a chess variant, which is played in a swimming pool. Instead of using chess clocks, each player must submerge themselves underwater during their turn, only to resurface when they are ready to make a move. Players must make a move within 5 seconds of resurfacing (they will receive a warning if not, and three warnings will result in a forfeit). Diving Chess was invented by American Chess Master Etan Ilfeld; the very first exhibition game took place between Ilfeld and former British Chess Champion William Hartston at the Thirdspace gym in Soho on August 2nd, 2011. Hartston won the match which lasted almost two hours such that each player was underwater for an entire hour.
4 0.84146118 218 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-20-I think you knew this already
Introduction: I was playing out a chess game from the newspaper and we reminded how the best players use the entire board in their game. In my own games (I’m not very good, I’m guessing my “rating” would be something like 1500?), the action always gets concentrated on one part of the board. Grandmaster games do get focused on particular squares of the board, of course, but, meanwhile, there are implications in other places and the action can suddenly shift.
5 0.83987385 1473 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-28-Turing chess run update
Introduction: In honor of the Olympics , I got my butt over to the park and played run-around-the-house chess for the first time ever. As was discussed in the comments thread awhile ago , there seem to be three possible ways to play Turing chess: 1. You make your move and run around the house. The other player has to move before you return. Once you sit down to the table, the other player runs around the house. Then you have to move, etc. You lose if you are checkmated or if you fail to move before your opponent returns to his chair. 2. You make your move and run around the house. The other player has to move before you return, but he does not have to wait until you return to start running. He can start running once he’s moved. Then when you get back you have to move before he gets back, but you can start to run once you’ve moved, etc. 3. You make your move and run around the house. The other player takes as long as he wants and makes his move, then he runs. When you return, yo
6 0.83119607 1818 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-22-Goal: Rules for Turing chess
7 0.79668748 1467 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-23-The pinch-hitter syndrome again
8 0.77851248 2105 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-18-What’s my Kasparov number?
9 0.72907269 813 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-21-Scrabble!
10 0.72225332 881 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-30-Rickey Henderson and Peter Angelos, together again
12 0.59436411 216 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-18-More forecasting competitions
13 0.59272611 2262 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-23-Win probabilities during a sporting event
14 0.5832032 29 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-12-Probability of successive wins in baseball
15 0.57485944 634 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-29-A.I. is Whatever We Can’t Yet Automate
16 0.54745656 562 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-06-Statistician cracks Toronto lottery
17 0.54349148 1903 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-17-Weak identification provides partial information
18 0.5352571 1899 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-14-Turing chess tournament!
19 0.52203876 1242 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-03-Best lottery story ever
20 0.52202064 59 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-30-Extended Binary Format Support for Mac OS X
topicId topicWeight
[(8, 0.01), (16, 0.039), (20, 0.021), (21, 0.045), (24, 0.109), (36, 0.218), (54, 0.038), (55, 0.043), (63, 0.02), (88, 0.016), (89, 0.019), (92, 0.01), (99, 0.234)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
1 0.94888639 1797 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-10-“Proposition and experiment”
Introduction: Anna Lena Phillips writes : I. Many people will not, of their own accord, look at a poem. II. Millions of people will, of their own accord, spend lots and lots of time looking at photographs of cats. III. Therefore, earlier this year, I concluded that the best strategy for increasing the number of viewers for poems would be to print them on top of photographs of cats. IV. I happen to like looking at both poems and cats. V. So this is, for me, a win-win situation. VI. Fortunately, my own cat is a patient model, and (if I am to be believed) quite photogenic. VII. The aforementioned cat is Tisko Tansi, small hero. VII. Thus I present to you (albeit in digital rather than physical form) an Endearments broadside, featuring a poem that originally appeared in BlazeVOX spring 2011. VIII. If you want to share a copy of this image, please ask first. If you want a real copy, you can ask about that too. She follows up with an image of a cat, on which is superimposed a short
2 0.94551504 176 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-02-Information is good
Introduction: Washington Post and Slate reporter Anne Applebaum wrote a dismissive column about Wikileaks, saying that they “offer nothing more than raw data.” Applebaum argues that “The notion that the Internet can replace traditional news-gathering has just been revealed to be a myth. . . . without more journalism, more investigation, more work, these documents just don’t matter that much.” Fine. But don’t undervalue the role of mere data! The usual story is that we don’t get to see the raw data underlying newspaper stories. Wikileaks and other crowdsourced data can be extremely useful, whether or not they replace “traditional news-gathering.”
3 0.94197702 1476 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-30-Stan is fast
Introduction: 10,000 iterations for 4 chains on the (precompiled) efficiently-parameterized 8-schools model: > date () [1] "Thu Aug 30 22:12:53 2012" > fit3 <- stan (fit=fit2, data = schools_dat, iter = 1e4, n_chains = 4) SAMPLING FOR MODEL 'anon_model' NOW (CHAIN 1). Iteration: 10000 / 10000 [100%] (Sampling) SAMPLING FOR MODEL 'anon_model' NOW (CHAIN 2). Iteration: 10000 / 10000 [100%] (Sampling) SAMPLING FOR MODEL 'anon_model' NOW (CHAIN 3). Iteration: 10000 / 10000 [100%] (Sampling) SAMPLING FOR MODEL 'anon_model' NOW (CHAIN 4). Iteration: 10000 / 10000 [100%] (Sampling) > date () [1] "Thu Aug 30 22:12:55 2012" > print (fit3) Inference for Stan model: anon_model. 4 chains: each with iter=10000; warmup=5000; thin=1; 10000 iterations saved. mean se_mean sd 2.5% 25% 50% 75% 97.5% n_eff Rhat mu 8.0 0.1 5.1 -2.0 4.7 8.0 11.3 18.4 4032 1 tau 6.7 0.1 5.6 0.3 2.5 5.4 9.3 21.2 2958 1 eta[1] 0.4 0.0 0.9 -1.5 -0
4 0.9398793 2242 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-10-Stan Model of the Week: PK Calculation of IV and Oral Dosing
Introduction: [Update: Revised given comments from Wingfeet, Andrew and germo. Thanks! I'd mistakenly translated the dlnorm priors in the first version --- amazing what a difference the priors make. I also escaped the less-than and greater-than signs in the constraints in the model so they're visible. I also updated to match the thin=2 output of JAGS.] We’re going to be starting a Stan “model of the P” (for some time period P) column, so I thought I’d kick things off with one of my own. I’ve been following the Wingvoet blog , the author of which is identified only by the Blogger handle Wingfeet ; a couple of days ago this lovely post came out: PK calculation of IV and oral dosing in JAGS Wingfeet’s post implemented an answer to question 6 from chapter 6 of problem from Rowland and Tozer’s 2010 book, Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics , Fourth edition, Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins. So in the grand tradition of using this blog to procrastinate, I thought I’d t
5 0.93923092 1478 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-31-Watercolor regression
Introduction: Solomon Hsiang writes: Two small follow-ups based on the discussion (the second/bigger one is to address your comment about the 95% CI edges). 1. I realized that if we plot the confidence intervals as a solid color that fades (eg. using the “fixed ink” scheme from before) we can make sure the regression line also has heightened visual weight where confidence is high by plotting the line white. This makes the contrast (and thus visual weight) between the regression line and the CI highest when the CI is narrow and dark. As the CI fade near the edges, so does the contrast with the regression line. This is a small adjustment, but I like it because it is so simple and it makes the graph much nicer. (see “visually_weighted_fill_reverse” attached). My posted code has been updated to do this automatically. 2. You and your readers didn’t like that the edges of the filled CI were so sharp and arbitrary. But I didn’t like that the contrast between the spaghetti lines and the background
6 0.91474551 551 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-02-Obama and Reagan, sitting in a tree, etc.
same-blog 7 0.89148122 1847 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-08-Of parsing and chess
9 0.87435687 370 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-25-Who gets wedding announcements in the Times?
10 0.86803043 1470 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-26-Graphs showing regression uncertainty: the code!
11 0.86596251 101 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-20-“People with an itch to scratch”
12 0.85954225 883 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-01-Arrow’s theorem update
13 0.85028625 1898 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-14-Progress! (on the understanding of the role of randomization in Bayesian inference)
15 0.84254754 2105 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-18-What’s my Kasparov number?
16 0.83378959 1666 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-10-They’d rather be rigorous than right
17 0.80886459 55 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-27-In Linux, use jags() to call Jags instead of using bugs() to call OpenBugs
18 0.80778468 394 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-05-2010: What happened?
19 0.80759776 998 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-08-Bayes-Godel
20 0.80559444 1900 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-15-Exploratory multilevel analysis when group-level variables are of importance