andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2014 andrew_gelman_stats-2014-2293 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: Prakash Nayak writes: I work as a musculoskeletal oncologist (surgeon) in Mumbai, India and am keen on sarcoma research. Sarcomas are rare disorders, and conventional frequentist analysis falls short of providing meaningful results for clinical application. I am thus keen on applying Bayesian analysis to a lot of trials performed with small numbers in this field. I need advise from you for a good starting point for someone uninitiated in Bayesian analysis. What to read, what courses to take and is there a way I could collaborate with any local/international statisticians dealing with these methods. I have attached a recent publication [Optimal timing of pulmonary metastasectomy – is a delayed operation beneficial or counterproductive?, by M. Kruger, J. D. Schmitto, B. Wiegmannn, T. K. Rajab, and A. Haverich] which is one amongst others I understand would benefit from some Bayesian analyses. I have no idea who in India works in this area so I’m just putting this one out
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 Prakash Nayak writes: I work as a musculoskeletal oncologist (surgeon) in Mumbai, India and am keen on sarcoma research. [sent-1, score-0.716]
2 Sarcomas are rare disorders, and conventional frequentist analysis falls short of providing meaningful results for clinical application. [sent-2, score-1.03]
3 I am thus keen on applying Bayesian analysis to a lot of trials performed with small numbers in this field. [sent-3, score-0.963]
4 I need advise from you for a good starting point for someone uninitiated in Bayesian analysis. [sent-4, score-0.361]
5 What to read, what courses to take and is there a way I could collaborate with any local/international statisticians dealing with these methods. [sent-5, score-0.483]
6 I have attached a recent publication [Optimal timing of pulmonary metastasectomy – is a delayed operation beneficial or counterproductive? [sent-6, score-1.062]
7 Haverich] which is one amongst others I understand would benefit from some Bayesian analyses. [sent-14, score-0.374]
8 I have no idea who in India works in this area so I’m just putting this one out there in the hope that someone will be able to make the connection. [sent-15, score-0.53]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('keen', 0.332), ('india', 0.301), ('mumbai', 0.202), ('pulmonary', 0.202), ('sarcoma', 0.202), ('delayed', 0.19), ('oncologist', 0.182), ('counterproductive', 0.182), ('disorders', 0.176), ('surgeon', 0.166), ('amongst', 0.162), ('bayesian', 0.157), ('beneficial', 0.156), ('timing', 0.153), ('advise', 0.153), ('operation', 0.153), ('collaborate', 0.153), ('optimal', 0.129), ('falls', 0.125), ('dealing', 0.124), ('courses', 0.124), ('meaningful', 0.124), ('providing', 0.119), ('trials', 0.119), ('attached', 0.119), ('applying', 0.114), ('clinical', 0.114), ('someone', 0.114), ('frequentist', 0.114), ('performed', 0.114), ('rare', 0.107), ('conventional', 0.107), ('connection', 0.102), ('putting', 0.098), ('benefit', 0.096), ('starting', 0.094), ('publication', 0.089), ('area', 0.088), ('analysis', 0.086), ('statisticians', 0.082), ('works', 0.081), ('hope', 0.078), ('short', 0.078), ('able', 0.071), ('numbers', 0.07), ('thus', 0.068), ('small', 0.06), ('understand', 0.059), ('others', 0.057), ('results', 0.056)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.99999994 2293 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-16-Looking for Bayesian expertise in India, for the purpose of analysis of sarcoma trials
Introduction: Prakash Nayak writes: I work as a musculoskeletal oncologist (surgeon) in Mumbai, India and am keen on sarcoma research. Sarcomas are rare disorders, and conventional frequentist analysis falls short of providing meaningful results for clinical application. I am thus keen on applying Bayesian analysis to a lot of trials performed with small numbers in this field. I need advise from you for a good starting point for someone uninitiated in Bayesian analysis. What to read, what courses to take and is there a way I could collaborate with any local/international statisticians dealing with these methods. I have attached a recent publication [Optimal timing of pulmonary metastasectomy – is a delayed operation beneficial or counterproductive?, by M. Kruger, J. D. Schmitto, B. Wiegmannn, T. K. Rajab, and A. Haverich] which is one amongst others I understand would benefit from some Bayesian analyses. I have no idea who in India works in this area so I’m just putting this one out
2 0.1846267 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
3 0.10784848 291 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-22-Philosophy of Bayes and non-Bayes: A dialogue with Deborah Mayo
Introduction: I sent Deborah Mayo a link to my paper with Cosma Shalizi on the philosophy of statistics, and she sent me the link to this conference which unfortunately already occurred. (It’s too bad, because I’d have liked to have been there.) I summarized my philosophy as follows: I am highly sympathetic to the approach of Lakatos (or of Popper, if you consider Lakatos’s “Popper_2″ to be a reasonable simulation of the true Popperism), in that (a) I view statistical models as being built within theoretical structures, and (b) I see the checking and refutation of models to be a key part of scientific progress. A big problem I have with mainstream Bayesianism is its “inductivist” view that science can operate completely smoothly with posterior updates: the idea that new data causes us to increase the posterior probability of good models and decrease the posterior probability of bad models. I don’t buy that: I see models as ever-changing entities that are flexible and can be patched and ex
4 0.10182489 2302 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-23-A short questionnaire regarding the subjective assessment of evidence
Introduction: E. J. Wagenmakers writes: Remember I briefly talked to you about the subjective assessment of evidence? Together with Richard Morey and myself, Annelies Bartlema created a short questionnaire that can be done online. There are five scenarios and it does not take more than 5 minutes to complete. So far we have collected responses from psychology faculty and psychology students, but we were also keen to get responses from a more statistically savvy crowd: the people who read your blog! Try it out!
5 0.094996475 1160 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-09-Familial Linkage between Neuropsychiatric Disorders and Intellectual Interests
Introduction: When I spoke at Princeton last year, I talked with neuroscientist Sam Wang, who told me about a project he did surveying incoming Princeton freshmen about mental illness in their families. He and his coauthor Benjamin Campbell found some interesting results, which they just published : A link between intellect and temperament has long been the subject of speculation. . . . Studies of the artistically inclined report linkage with familial depression, while among eminent and creative scientists, a lower incidence of affective disorders is found. In the case of developmental disorders, a heightened prevalence of autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) has been found in the families of mathematicians, physicists, and engineers. . . . We surveyed the incoming class of 2014 at Princeton University about their intended academic major, familial incidence of neuropsychiatric disorders, and demographic variables. . . . Consistent with prior findings, we noticed a relation between intended academ
6 0.093087107 1554 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-31-It not necessary that Bayesian methods conform to the likelihood principle
7 0.091541849 411 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-13-Ethical concerns in medical trials
8 0.086032301 1719 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-11-Why waste time philosophizing?
9 0.081767172 1182 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-24-Untangling the Jeffreys-Lindley paradox
10 0.081065334 534 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-24-Bayes at the end
11 0.079430655 1610 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-06-Yes, checking calibration of probability forecasts is part of Bayesian statistics
12 0.077594832 1205 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-09-Coming to agreement on philosophy of statistics
14 0.077236094 568 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-11-Calibration in chess
15 0.076619007 427 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-23-Bayesian adaptive methods for clinical trials
16 0.074734658 2009 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-05-A locally organized online BDA course on G+ hangout?
17 0.074465804 1291 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-30-Systematic review of publication bias in studies on publication bias
18 0.074420795 1695 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-28-Economists argue about Bayes
19 0.072943062 247 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-01-How does Bayes do it?
20 0.072590575 1560 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-03-Statistical methods that work in some settings but not others
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.109), (1, 0.042), (2, -0.054), (3, 0.009), (4, -0.051), (5, 0.007), (6, -0.015), (7, 0.044), (8, 0.004), (9, -0.044), (10, 0.007), (11, -0.028), (12, 0.024), (13, 0.028), (14, 0.043), (15, 0.034), (16, 0.032), (17, 0.007), (18, 0.016), (19, 0.039), (20, -0.017), (21, 0.07), (22, 0.007), (23, 0.021), (24, -0.006), (25, -0.049), (26, 0.011), (27, -0.026), (28, -0.02), (29, 0.023), (30, 0.013), (31, 0.01), (32, -0.005), (33, 0.03), (34, 0.019), (35, -0.029), (36, -0.015), (37, 0.029), (38, 0.0), (39, 0.004), (40, 0.016), (41, -0.004), (42, -0.036), (43, 0.009), (44, 0.016), (45, -0.016), (46, 0.026), (47, 0.047), (48, 0.003), (49, -0.005)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.97899348 2293 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-16-Looking for Bayesian expertise in India, for the purpose of analysis of sarcoma trials
Introduction: Prakash Nayak writes: I work as a musculoskeletal oncologist (surgeon) in Mumbai, India and am keen on sarcoma research. Sarcomas are rare disorders, and conventional frequentist analysis falls short of providing meaningful results for clinical application. I am thus keen on applying Bayesian analysis to a lot of trials performed with small numbers in this field. I need advise from you for a good starting point for someone uninitiated in Bayesian analysis. What to read, what courses to take and is there a way I could collaborate with any local/international statisticians dealing with these methods. I have attached a recent publication [Optimal timing of pulmonary metastasectomy – is a delayed operation beneficial or counterproductive?, by M. Kruger, J. D. Schmitto, B. Wiegmannn, T. K. Rajab, and A. Haverich] which is one amongst others I understand would benefit from some Bayesian analyses. I have no idea who in India works in this area so I’m just putting this one out
2 0.83232707 2368 andrew gelman stats-2014-06-11-Bayes in the research conversation
Introduction: Charlie Williams writes: As I get interested in Bayesian approaches to statistics, I have one question I wondered if you would find interesting to address at some point on the blog. What does Bayesian work look like in action across a field? From experience, I have some feeling for how ongoing debates evolve (or not) with subsequent studies in response to earlier findings. I wonder if you know how this happens in practice when multiple researchers are using Bayesian approaches. How much are previous findings built into priors? How much advance comes from model improvement? And in a social science field where self-selection and self-interest play a role, how are improved “treatment” effects incorporated and evaluated? I thought you might know of a field where actual back and forth has been carried out mostly in the context of Bayesian analysis or inference, and I thought it would be interesting to take a look at an example as I think about my own field. My reply: I’ve seen Ba
3 0.81999475 1228 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-25-Continuous variables in Bayesian networks
Introduction: Antti Rasinen writes: I’m a former undergrad machine learning student and a current software engineer with a Bayesian hobby. Today my two worlds collided. I ask for some enlightenment. On your blog you’ve repeatedly advocated continuous distributions with Bayesian models. Today I read this article by Ricky Ho, who writes: The strength of Bayesian network is it is highly scalable and can learn incrementally because all we do is to count the observed variables and update the probability distribution table. Similar to Neural Network, Bayesian network expects all data to be binary, categorical variable will need to be transformed into multiple binary variable as described above. Numeric variable is generally not a good fit for Bayesian network. The last sentence seems to be at odds with what you’ve said. Sadly, I don’t have enough expertise to say which view of the world is correct. During my undergrad years our team wrote an implementation of the Junction Tree algorithm. We r
4 0.81447941 1259 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-11-How things sound to us, versus how they sound to others
Introduction: Hykel Hosni noticed this bit from the Lindley Prize page of the Society for Bayesan Analysis: Lindley became a great missionary for the Bayesian gospel. The atmosphere of the Bayesian revival is captured in a comment by Rivett on Lindley’s move to University College London and the premier chair of statistics in Britain: “it was as though a Jehovah’s Witness had been elected Pope.” From my perspective, this was amusing (if commonplace): a group of rationalists jocularly characterizing themselves as religious fanatics. And some of this is in response to intense opposition from outsiders (see the Background section here ). That’s my view. I’m an insider, a statistician who’s heard all jokes about religious Bayesians, from Bayesian and non-Bayesian statisticians alike. But Hosni is an outsider, and here’s how he sees the above-quoted paragraph: Research, however, is not a matter of faith but a matter of arguments, which should always be evaluated with the utmost intellec
5 0.80982006 117 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-29-Ya don’t know Bayes, Jack
Introduction: I came across this article on the philosophy of statistics by University of Michigan economist John DiNardo. I don’t have much to say about the substance of the article because most of it is an argument against something called “Bayesian methods” that doesn’t have much in common with the Bayesian data analysis that I do. If an quantitative, empirically-minded economist at a top university doesn’t know about modern Bayesian methods, then it’s a pretty good guess that confusion holds in many other quarters as well, so I thought I’d try to clear a couple of things up. (See also here .) In the short term, I know I have some readers at the University of Michigan, so maybe a couple of you could go over to Prof. DiNardo’s office and discuss this with him? For the rest of you, please spread the word. My point here is not to claim that DiNardo should be using Bayesian methods or to claim that he’s doing anything wrong in his applied work. It’s just that he’s fighting against a bu
6 0.80288702 1610 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-06-Yes, checking calibration of probability forecasts is part of Bayesian statistics
7 0.80205005 2000 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-28-Why during the 1950-1960′s did Jerry Cornfield become a Bayesian?
8 0.79214889 1438 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-31-What is a Bayesian?
9 0.78609651 1781 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-29-Another Feller theory
10 0.77423817 449 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-04-Generalized Method of Moments, whatever that is
11 0.77243805 205 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-13-Arnold Zellner
12 0.77055281 183 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-04-Bayesian models for simultaneous equation systems?
13 0.7691294 83 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-13-Silly Sas lays out old-fashioned statistical thinking
14 0.76792353 1151 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-03-Philosophy of Bayesian statistics: my reactions to Senn
15 0.76764965 792 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-08-The virtues of incoherence?
16 0.7620014 133 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-08-Gratuitous use of “Bayesian Statistics,” a branding issue?
17 0.76091927 1262 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-12-“Not only defended but also applied”: The perceived absurdity of Bayesian inference
18 0.7568233 2254 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-18-Those wacky anti-Bayesians used to be intimidating, but now they’re just pathetic
19 0.75394028 1497 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-15-Our blog makes connections!
20 0.75136697 114 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-28-More on Bayesian deduction-induction
topicId topicWeight
[(5, 0.02), (6, 0.052), (13, 0.026), (14, 0.024), (16, 0.016), (18, 0.021), (24, 0.08), (30, 0.084), (36, 0.043), (54, 0.058), (60, 0.022), (62, 0.035), (63, 0.036), (64, 0.024), (81, 0.038), (89, 0.072), (90, 0.017), (99, 0.23)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.91934621 2293 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-16-Looking for Bayesian expertise in India, for the purpose of analysis of sarcoma trials
Introduction: Prakash Nayak writes: I work as a musculoskeletal oncologist (surgeon) in Mumbai, India and am keen on sarcoma research. Sarcomas are rare disorders, and conventional frequentist analysis falls short of providing meaningful results for clinical application. I am thus keen on applying Bayesian analysis to a lot of trials performed with small numbers in this field. I need advise from you for a good starting point for someone uninitiated in Bayesian analysis. What to read, what courses to take and is there a way I could collaborate with any local/international statisticians dealing with these methods. I have attached a recent publication [Optimal timing of pulmonary metastasectomy – is a delayed operation beneficial or counterproductive?, by M. Kruger, J. D. Schmitto, B. Wiegmannn, T. K. Rajab, and A. Haverich] which is one amongst others I understand would benefit from some Bayesian analyses. I have no idea who in India works in this area so I’m just putting this one out
2 0.8775571 1497 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-15-Our blog makes connections!
Introduction: Steve Cohen writes: Thank you for fulfilling another request of mine almost two years ago. I gave you a job description of a senior Bayesian statistical software developer that I was loooking to hire. You kindly posted it on your site. THAT EVENING, I received a response from a fellow in Florida who had worked as a C++ programmer for 10+ years and — inexplicably — was now finishing his PhD in Bayesian econometrics. We hired him and he has done magical things with our software, making estimating hierarchical Bayesian models in “real time” on very large, complex datasets a reality. He’s a super guy, to boot! Together with others on our staff, we now have fully parallelized versions of most econometric models working on over 100 cores. (You may have read a paper by one of my partners, Prof John Liechty at Penn State, on parallel slicer samplers).
3 0.86661452 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 0.86645508 1259 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-11-How things sound to us, versus how they sound to others
Introduction: Hykel Hosni noticed this bit from the Lindley Prize page of the Society for Bayesan Analysis: Lindley became a great missionary for the Bayesian gospel. The atmosphere of the Bayesian revival is captured in a comment by Rivett on Lindley’s move to University College London and the premier chair of statistics in Britain: “it was as though a Jehovah’s Witness had been elected Pope.” From my perspective, this was amusing (if commonplace): a group of rationalists jocularly characterizing themselves as religious fanatics. And some of this is in response to intense opposition from outsiders (see the Background section here ). That’s my view. I’m an insider, a statistician who’s heard all jokes about religious Bayesians, from Bayesian and non-Bayesian statisticians alike. But Hosni is an outsider, and here’s how he sees the above-quoted paragraph: Research, however, is not a matter of faith but a matter of arguments, which should always be evaluated with the utmost intellec
Introduction: Howard Wainer writes : When we focus only on the differences between groups, we too easily lose track of the big picture. Nowhere is this more obvious than in the current public discussions of the size of the gap in test scores that is observed between racial groups. It has been noted that in New Jersey the gap between the average scores of white and black students on the well-developed scale of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) has shrunk by only about 25 percent over the past two decades. The conclusion drawn was that even though the change is in the right direction, it is far too slow. But focusing on the difference blinds us to what has been a remarkable success in education over the past 20 years. Although the direction and size of student improvements are considered across many subject areas and many age groups, I will describe just one — 4th grade mathematics. . . . there have been steep gains for both racial groups over this period (somewhat steeper g
6 0.8602891 1831 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-29-The Great Race
7 0.85976756 1623 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-14-GiveWell charity recommendations
8 0.85924965 1768 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-18-Mertz’s reply to Unz’s response to Mertz’s comments on Unz’s article
9 0.8591615 850 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-11-Understanding how estimates change when you move to a multilevel model
10 0.85832822 566 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-09-The boxer, the wrestler, and the coin flip, again
12 0.85715568 1473 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-28-Turing chess run update
13 0.85661238 1320 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-14-Question 4 of my final exam for Design and Analysis of Sample Surveys
14 0.8562333 179 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-03-An Olympic size swimming pool full of lithium water
15 0.85568225 1628 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-17-Statistics in a world where nothing is random
16 0.85483426 631 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-28-Explaining that plot.
17 0.85469711 1178 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-21-How many data points do you really have?
18 0.85439479 1195 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-04-Multiple comparisons dispute in the tabloids
19 0.85271311 1783 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-31-He’s getting ready to write a book
20 0.85230589 109 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-25-Classics of statistics