andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2014 andrew_gelman_stats-2014-2285 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: Mon : How literature is like statistical reasoning: Kosara on stories. Gelman and Basbøll on stories. Tues : Understanding Simpson’s paradox using a graph Wed : Advice: positive-sum, zero-sum, or negative-sum Thurs : Small multiples of lineplots > maps (ok, not always, but yes in this case) Fri : “More research from the lunatic fringe” Sat : “Schools of statistical thoughts are sometimes jokingly likened to religions. This analogy is not perfect—unlike religions, statistical methods have no supernatural content and make essentially no demands on our personal lives. Looking at the comparison from the other direction, it is possible to be agnostic, atheistic, or simply live one’s life without religion, but it is not really possible to do statistics without some philosophy.” Sun : I was wrong . . .
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 Mon : How literature is like statistical reasoning: Kosara on stories. [sent-1, score-0.208]
2 This analogy is not perfect—unlike religions, statistical methods have no supernatural content and make essentially no demands on our personal lives. [sent-4, score-0.923]
3 Looking at the comparison from the other direction, it is possible to be agnostic, atheistic, or simply live one’s life without religion, but it is not really possible to do statistics without some philosophy. [sent-5, score-0.864]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('agnostic', 0.22), ('atheistic', 0.22), ('jokingly', 0.22), ('supernatural', 0.207), ('religions', 0.207), ('likened', 0.207), ('lunatic', 0.198), ('lineplots', 0.186), ('fringe', 0.186), ('multiples', 0.181), ('simpson', 0.177), ('demands', 0.173), ('kosara', 0.173), ('sun', 0.153), ('fri', 0.15), ('mon', 0.147), ('tues', 0.147), ('thurs', 0.143), ('wed', 0.143), ('religion', 0.135), ('possible', 0.134), ('basb', 0.134), ('paradox', 0.13), ('maps', 0.128), ('statistical', 0.127), ('unlike', 0.122), ('sat', 0.121), ('without', 0.115), ('analogy', 0.114), ('content', 0.111), ('schools', 0.111), ('perfect', 0.109), ('reasoning', 0.105), ('live', 0.103), ('gelman', 0.097), ('comparison', 0.097), ('essentially', 0.097), ('direction', 0.096), ('personal', 0.094), ('advice', 0.094), ('life', 0.087), ('thoughts', 0.085), ('literature', 0.081), ('understanding', 0.079), ('simply', 0.079), ('graph', 0.076), ('ok', 0.075), ('yes', 0.073), ('sometimes', 0.071), ('looking', 0.071)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.99999994 2285 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-07-On deck this week
Introduction: Mon : How literature is like statistical reasoning: Kosara on stories. Gelman and Basbøll on stories. Tues : Understanding Simpson’s paradox using a graph Wed : Advice: positive-sum, zero-sum, or negative-sum Thurs : Small multiples of lineplots > maps (ok, not always, but yes in this case) Fri : “More research from the lunatic fringe” Sat : “Schools of statistical thoughts are sometimes jokingly likened to religions. This analogy is not perfect—unlike religions, statistical methods have no supernatural content and make essentially no demands on our personal lives. Looking at the comparison from the other direction, it is possible to be agnostic, atheistic, or simply live one’s life without religion, but it is not really possible to do statistics without some philosophy.” Sun : I was wrong . . .
2 0.37703344 2264 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-24-On deck this month
Introduction: Actually, more like the next month and a half . . . I just have this long backlog so I thought I might as well share it with you: Empirical implications of Empirical Implications of Theoretical Models A statistical graphics course and statistical graphics advice What property is important in a risk prediction model? Discrimination or calibration? Beyond the Valley of the Trolls Science tells us that fast food lovers are more likely to marry other fast food lovers References (with code) for Bayesian hierarchical (multilevel) modeling and structural equation modeling Adjudicating between alternative interpretations of a statistical interaction? The most-cited statistics papers ever American Psychological Society announces a new journal Am I too negative? As the boldest experiment in journalism history, you admit you made a mistake Personally, I’d rather go with Teragram Bizarre academic spam An old discussion of food deserts Skepticism about a published cl
3 0.21656676 2290 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-14-On deck this week
Introduction: Mon : Transitioning to Stan Tues : When you believe in things that you don’t understand Wed : Looking for Bayesian expertise in India, for the purpose of analysis of sarcoma trials Thurs : If you get to the point of asking, just do it. But some difficulties do arise . . . Fri : One-tailed or two-tailed? Sat : Index or indicator variables Sun : Fooled by randomness
4 0.20564261 2366 andrew gelman stats-2014-06-09-On deck this week
Introduction: Mon: I hate polynomials Tues: Spring forward, fall back, drop dead? Wed: Bayes in the research conversation Thurs: The health policy innovation center: how best to move from pilot studies to large-scale practice? Fri: Stroopy names Sat: He’s not so great in math but wants to do statistics and machine learning Sun: Comparing the full model to the partial model
5 0.20560819 2240 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-10-On deck this week: Things people sent me
Introduction: Mon: Preregistration: what’s in it for you? Tues: What if I were to stop publishing in journals? Wed: Empirical implications of Empirical Implications of Theoretical Models Thurs: An Economist’s Guide to Visualizing Data Fri: The maximal information coefficient Sat: Problematic interpretations of confidence intervals Sun: The more you look, the more you find
6 0.19816068 2321 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-05-On deck this week
7 0.19297819 2348 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-26-On deck this week
8 0.18322799 2276 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-31-On deck this week
9 0.1691487 2331 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-12-On deck this week
10 0.16457728 2339 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-19-On deck this week
11 0.15969919 2253 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-17-On deck this week: Revisitings
12 0.15818223 2356 andrew gelman stats-2014-06-02-On deck this week
13 0.15797508 2206 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-10-On deck this week
14 0.15405181 2298 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-21-On deck this week
15 0.14550826 2310 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-28-On deck this week
16 0.14061609 2222 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-24-On deck this week
17 0.1389278 2265 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-24-On deck this week
18 0.12899046 2214 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-17-On deck this week
19 0.1155223 2286 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-08-Understanding Simpson’s paradox using a graph
20 0.10253579 800 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-13-I like lineplots
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.113), (1, -0.011), (2, -0.059), (3, 0.008), (4, 0.025), (5, -0.026), (6, -0.094), (7, 0.003), (8, 0.006), (9, -0.052), (10, -0.067), (11, 0.276), (12, 0.102), (13, 0.201), (14, -0.012), (15, -0.047), (16, 0.015), (17, -0.004), (18, 0.071), (19, -0.038), (20, -0.037), (21, 0.028), (22, 0.006), (23, 0.062), (24, 0.026), (25, -0.044), (26, 0.042), (27, 0.094), (28, -0.053), (29, 0.02), (30, 0.034), (31, 0.04), (32, -0.001), (33, 0.059), (34, 0.037), (35, -0.03), (36, -0.026), (37, -0.014), (38, -0.032), (39, 0.008), (40, 0.042), (41, -0.032), (42, -0.036), (43, 0.018), (44, -0.004), (45, -0.003), (46, -0.028), (47, -0.02), (48, 0.014), (49, 0.014)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.94685882 2285 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-07-On deck this week
Introduction: Mon : How literature is like statistical reasoning: Kosara on stories. Gelman and Basbøll on stories. Tues : Understanding Simpson’s paradox using a graph Wed : Advice: positive-sum, zero-sum, or negative-sum Thurs : Small multiples of lineplots > maps (ok, not always, but yes in this case) Fri : “More research from the lunatic fringe” Sat : “Schools of statistical thoughts are sometimes jokingly likened to religions. This analogy is not perfect—unlike religions, statistical methods have no supernatural content and make essentially no demands on our personal lives. Looking at the comparison from the other direction, it is possible to be agnostic, atheistic, or simply live one’s life without religion, but it is not really possible to do statistics without some philosophy.” Sun : I was wrong . . .
2 0.88269609 2310 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-28-On deck this week
Introduction: Mon : Crowdstorming a dataset Tues : Ken Rice presents a unifying approach to statistical inference and hypothesis testing Wed : The health policy innovation center: how best to move from pilot studies to large-scale practice? Thurs : Heller, Heller, and Gorfine on univariate and multivariate information measures Fri : Discovering general multidimensional associations Sat : “The graph clearly shows that mammography adds virtually nothing to survival and if anything, decreases survival (and increases cost and provides unnecessary treatment)” Sun : Honored oldsters write about statistics
3 0.87642086 2298 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-21-On deck this week
Introduction: Mon : Ticket to Baaaath Tues : Ticket to Baaaaarf Wed : Thinking of doing a list experiment? Here’s a list of reasons why you should think again Thurs : An open site for researchers to post and share papers Fri : Questions about “Too Good to Be True” Sat : Sleazy sock puppet can’t stop spamming our discussion of compressed sensing and promoting the work of Xiteng Liu Sun : White stripes and dead armadillos
4 0.8553139 2276 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-31-On deck this week
Introduction: Mon : The most-cited statistics papers ever Tues : American Psychological Society announces a new journal Wed : Am I too negative? Thurs : As the boldest experiment in journalism history, you admit you made a mistake Fri : The Notorious N.H.S.T. presents: Mo P-values Mo Problems Sat : Bizarre academic spam Sun : An old discussion of food deserts
5 0.84978622 2290 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-14-On deck this week
Introduction: Mon : Transitioning to Stan Tues : When you believe in things that you don’t understand Wed : Looking for Bayesian expertise in India, for the purpose of analysis of sarcoma trials Thurs : If you get to the point of asking, just do it. But some difficulties do arise . . . Fri : One-tailed or two-tailed? Sat : Index or indicator variables Sun : Fooled by randomness
6 0.83058327 2240 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-10-On deck this week: Things people sent me
7 0.7937066 2366 andrew gelman stats-2014-06-09-On deck this week
8 0.78678262 2206 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-10-On deck this week
9 0.77330047 2253 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-17-On deck this week: Revisitings
10 0.77311391 2265 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-24-On deck this week
11 0.76749462 2331 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-12-On deck this week
12 0.76455766 2348 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-26-On deck this week
13 0.75788403 2214 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-17-On deck this week
14 0.75709647 2264 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-24-On deck this month
15 0.75585127 2356 andrew gelman stats-2014-06-02-On deck this week
16 0.72733253 2321 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-05-On deck this week
17 0.71692449 2339 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-19-On deck this week
18 0.68496221 679 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-25-My talk at Stanford on Tuesday
19 0.62629217 2222 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-24-On deck this week
topicId topicWeight
[(13, 0.024), (23, 0.039), (24, 0.068), (42, 0.07), (43, 0.019), (47, 0.034), (57, 0.06), (59, 0.137), (62, 0.027), (71, 0.019), (75, 0.039), (76, 0.015), (82, 0.027), (89, 0.02), (93, 0.024), (98, 0.02), (99, 0.258)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.93279529 2285 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-07-On deck this week
Introduction: Mon : How literature is like statistical reasoning: Kosara on stories. Gelman and Basbøll on stories. Tues : Understanding Simpson’s paradox using a graph Wed : Advice: positive-sum, zero-sum, or negative-sum Thurs : Small multiples of lineplots > maps (ok, not always, but yes in this case) Fri : “More research from the lunatic fringe” Sat : “Schools of statistical thoughts are sometimes jokingly likened to religions. This analogy is not perfect—unlike religions, statistical methods have no supernatural content and make essentially no demands on our personal lives. Looking at the comparison from the other direction, it is possible to be agnostic, atheistic, or simply live one’s life without religion, but it is not really possible to do statistics without some philosophy.” Sun : I was wrong . . .
2 0.89220488 965 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-19-Web-friendly visualizations in R
Introduction: Aleks points me to this new tool from Wojciech Gryc. Right now I save my graphs as pdfs or pngs and then upload them to put them on the web. I expect I’ll still be doing this for awhile—I like having full control of what my graphs look like—but Gryc’s default plots might be useful for lots of people making their analyses more accessible. Here’s an example: x = rnorm(30) y = rnorm(30) wv.plot(x, y, "~/Desktop/scatterplot", height=300, width=300, xlim=c(-2.5,2.5), ylim=c(-2.5,2.5), xbreaks=c(0), ybreaks=c(0))
3 0.88543034 853 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-14-Preferential admissions for children of elite colleges
Introduction: Jenny Anderson reports on a discussion of the practice of colleges preferential admission of children of alumni: [Richard] Kahlenberg citing research from his book “Affirmative Action for the Rich: Legacy Preferences in College Admissions” made the case that getting into good schools matters — 12 institutions making up less than 1 percent of the U.S. population produced 42 percent of government leaders and 54 percent of corporate leaders. And being a legacy helps improve an applicant’s chances of getting in, with one study finding that being a primary legacy — the son or daughter of an undergraduate alumnus or alumna — increases one’s chance of admission by 45.1 percent. I’d call that 45 percent but I get the basic idea. But then Jeffrey Brenzel of the Yale admissions office replied: “We turn away 80 percent of our legacies, and we feel it every day,” Mr. Brenzel said, adding that he rejected more offspring of the school’s Sterling donors than he accepted this year (
4 0.87754178 771 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-16-30 days of statistics
Introduction: I was talking with a colleague about one of our research projects and said that I would write something up, if blogging didn’t get in the way. She suggested that for the next month I just blog about my research ideas. So I think I’ll do that. This means no mocking of plagiarists, no reflections on literature, no answers to miscellaneous questions about how many groups you need in a multilevel model, no rants about economists, no links to pretty graphs, etc., for 30 days. Meanwhile, I have a roughly 30-day backlog. So after my next 30 days of stat blogging, the backlog will gradually appear. There’s some good stuff there, including reflections on Milos, a (sincere) tribute to the haters, an updated Twitteo Killed the Bloggio Star, a question about acupuncture, and some remote statistical modeling advice I gave that actually worked! I’m sure you’ll enjoy it. But you’ll have to wait for all that fun stuff. For the next thirty days, it’s statistics research every day. P.S. I
5 0.87720084 1408 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-07-Not much difference between communicating to self and communicating to others
Introduction: Thomas Basbøll writes : [Advertising executive] Russell Davies wrote a blog post called “The Tyranny of the Big Idea”. His five-point procedure begins: Start doing stuff. Start executing things which seem right. Do it quickly and do it often. Don’t cling onto anything, good or bad. Don’t repeat much. Take what was good and do it differently. And ends with: “And something else and something else.” This inspires several thoughts, which I’ll take advantage of the blog format to present with no attempt to be cohesively organized. 1. My first concern is the extent to which productivity-enhancing advice such as Davies’s (and Basbøll’s) is zero or even negative-sum , just helping people in the rat race. But, upon reflection, I’d rate the recommendations as positive-sum. If people learn to write better and be more productive, that’s not (necessarily) just positional. 2. Blogging fits with the “Do it quickly and do it often” advice. 3. I wonder what Basbøll thinks abo
6 0.87685955 1764 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-15-How do I make my graphs?
8 0.87545848 229 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-24-Bizarre twisty argument about medical diagnostic tests
9 0.87284911 214 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-17-Probability-processing hardware
10 0.8691681 1377 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-13-A question about AIC
11 0.8675366 1000 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-10-Forecasting 2012: How much does ideology matter?
12 0.86467671 2206 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-10-On deck this week
14 0.8579734 1190 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-29-Why “Why”?
15 0.85399562 2321 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-05-On deck this week
16 0.853374 199 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-11-Note to semi-spammers
17 0.84990323 555 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-04-Handy Matrix Cheat Sheet, with Gradients
18 0.84828222 34 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-14-Non-academic writings on literature
19 0.8474853 2230 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-02-What is it with Americans in Olympic ski teams from tropical countries?
20 0.84346044 766 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-14-Last Wegman post (for now)