andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2014 andrew_gelman_stats-2014-2348 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: Mon: WAIC and cross-validation in Stan! Tues: A whole fleet of gremlins: Looking more carefully at Richard Tol’s twice-corrected paper, “The Economic Effects of Climate Change” Wed: Just wondering Thurs: When you believe in things that you don’t understand Fri: I posted this as a comment on a sociology blog Sat: “Building on theories used to describe magnets, scientists have put together a model that captures something very different . . .” Sun: Why we hate stepwise regression
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('fleet', 0.284), ('gremlins', 0.284), ('tol', 0.284), ('stepwise', 0.247), ('waic', 0.24), ('captures', 0.203), ('sun', 0.198), ('fri', 0.193), ('mon', 0.189), ('tues', 0.189), ('thurs', 0.184), ('wed', 0.184), ('climate', 0.167), ('sociology', 0.16), ('sat', 0.156), ('theories', 0.152), ('richard', 0.151), ('hate', 0.147), ('building', 0.139), ('wondering', 0.133), ('describe', 0.133), ('carefully', 0.13), ('posted', 0.124), ('stan', 0.123), ('together', 0.113), ('scientists', 0.107), ('economic', 0.104), ('whole', 0.104), ('change', 0.099), ('comment', 0.096), ('looking', 0.091), ('regression', 0.091), ('believe', 0.089), ('effects', 0.088), ('understand', 0.084), ('put', 0.071), ('used', 0.068), ('things', 0.063), ('blog', 0.063), ('paper', 0.059), ('different', 0.056), ('model', 0.056), ('something', 0.055)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 1.0000001 2348 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-26-On deck this week
Introduction: Mon: WAIC and cross-validation in Stan! Tues: A whole fleet of gremlins: Looking more carefully at Richard Tol’s twice-corrected paper, “The Economic Effects of Climate Change” Wed: Just wondering Thurs: When you believe in things that you don’t understand Fri: I posted this as a comment on a sociology blog Sat: “Building on theories used to describe magnets, scientists have put together a model that captures something very different . . .” Sun: Why we hate stepwise regression
2 0.3177225 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
Introduction: We had a discussion the other day of a paper, “The Economic Effects of Climate Change,” by economist Richard Tol. The paper came to my attention after I saw a notice from Adam Marcus that it was recently revised because of data errors. But after looking at the paper more carefully, I see a bunch of other problems that, to me, make the whole analysis close to useless as it stands. I think this is worth discussing because the paper has been somewhat influential (so far cited 328 times, according to Google Scholar) and has even been cited in the popular press as evidence that “Climate change has done more good than harm so far and is likely to continue doing so for most of this century . . . There are many likely effects of climate change: positive and negative, economic and ecological, humanitarian and financial. And if you aggregate them all, the overall effect is positive today — and likely to stay positive until around 2080. That was the conclusion of Professor Richard Tol
4 0.28821123 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 0.27382287 2356 andrew gelman stats-2014-06-02-On deck this week
Introduction: Mon: Why we hate stepwise regression Tues: Did you buy laundry detergent on their most recent trip to the store? Also comments on scientific publication and yet another suggestion to do a study that allows within-person comparisons Wed: All the Assumptions That Are My Life Thurs: Identifying pathways for managing multiple disturbances to limit plant invasions Fri: Statistically savvy journalism Sat: “Does researching casual marijuana use cause brain abnormalities?” Sun: Regression and causality and variable ordering
6 0.26527774 2240 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-10-On deck this week: Things people sent me
7 0.24864028 2321 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-05-On deck this week
8 0.23299129 2276 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-31-On deck this week
9 0.22651333 2339 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-19-On deck this week
10 0.22107506 2331 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-12-On deck this week
11 0.21129006 2357 andrew gelman stats-2014-06-02-Why we hate stepwise regression
12 0.19899017 2253 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-17-On deck this week: Revisitings
13 0.1987592 2298 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-21-On deck this week
14 0.19767609 2206 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-10-On deck this week
15 0.19381374 2222 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-24-On deck this week
16 0.19297819 2285 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-07-On deck this week
17 0.17956018 2349 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-26-WAIC and cross-validation in Stan!
18 0.17197567 2310 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-28-On deck this week
19 0.15487514 2265 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-24-On deck this week
20 0.15135042 2214 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-17-On deck this week
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.102), (1, 0.028), (2, -0.025), (3, 0.01), (4, 0.024), (5, 0.027), (6, -0.038), (7, -0.141), (8, 0.043), (9, -0.053), (10, -0.105), (11, 0.365), (12, 0.094), (13, 0.214), (14, 0.005), (15, -0.022), (16, 0.023), (17, 0.048), (18, 0.047), (19, -0.033), (20, -0.013), (21, 0.045), (22, -0.037), (23, 0.054), (24, 0.041), (25, -0.102), (26, 0.067), (27, 0.018), (28, -0.039), (29, 0.027), (30, 0.007), (31, 0.036), (32, 0.015), (33, -0.006), (34, -0.039), (35, -0.024), (36, 0.004), (37, -0.042), (38, -0.024), (39, -0.016), (40, 0.05), (41, 0.056), (42, -0.027), (43, 0.003), (44, 0.035), (45, 0.01), (46, -0.034), (47, 0.028), (48, 0.015), (49, 0.014)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.96367472 2348 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-26-On deck this week
Introduction: Mon: WAIC and cross-validation in Stan! Tues: A whole fleet of gremlins: Looking more carefully at Richard Tol’s twice-corrected paper, “The Economic Effects of Climate Change” Wed: Just wondering Thurs: When you believe in things that you don’t understand Fri: I posted this as a comment on a sociology blog Sat: “Building on theories used to describe magnets, scientists have put together a model that captures something very different . . .” Sun: Why we hate stepwise regression
2 0.88883615 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 0.86280179 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 0.84336382 2331 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-12-On deck this week
Introduction: Mon: “The results (not shown) . . .” Tues: Personally, I’d rather go with Teragram Wed: How much can we learn about individual-level causal claims from state-level correlations? Thurs: Bill Easterly vs. Jeff Sachs: What percentage of the recipients didn’t use the free malaria bed nets in Zambia? Fri: Models with constraints Sat: Forum in Ecology on p-values and model selection Sun: Never back down: The culture of poverty and the culture of journalism
5 0.83909249 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 0.83444405 2356 andrew gelman stats-2014-06-02-On deck this week
7 0.83198798 2276 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-31-On deck this week
8 0.78871942 2366 andrew gelman stats-2014-06-09-On deck this week
9 0.77714753 2321 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-05-On deck this week
10 0.75478446 2253 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-17-On deck this week: Revisitings
11 0.75415093 2310 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-28-On deck this week
12 0.75330061 2339 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-19-On deck this week
13 0.74484497 2206 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-10-On deck this week
14 0.7386331 2214 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-17-On deck this week
15 0.71643871 2265 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-24-On deck this week
16 0.7153331 2285 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-07-On deck this week
17 0.63637739 2222 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-24-On deck this week
18 0.60508454 2264 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-24-On deck this month
19 0.60346639 165 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-27-Nothing is Linear, Nothing is Additive: Bayesian Models for Interactions in Social Science
20 0.55722576 2320 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-05-On deck this month
topicId topicWeight
[(21, 0.083), (24, 0.079), (27, 0.042), (31, 0.093), (42, 0.058), (43, 0.029), (47, 0.085), (61, 0.036), (71, 0.054), (89, 0.03), (98, 0.029), (99, 0.254)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.94190651 2348 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-26-On deck this week
Introduction: Mon: WAIC and cross-validation in Stan! Tues: A whole fleet of gremlins: Looking more carefully at Richard Tol’s twice-corrected paper, “The Economic Effects of Climate Change” Wed: Just wondering Thurs: When you believe in things that you don’t understand Fri: I posted this as a comment on a sociology blog Sat: “Building on theories used to describe magnets, scientists have put together a model that captures something very different . . .” Sun: Why we hate stepwise regression
2 0.87367314 1995 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-23-“I mean, what exact buttons do I have to hit?”
Introduction: This American Life reporter Gabriel Rhodes says : This is one of the big differences between Jon and Anthony, between scientist and non-scientist. For Jon, having a year’s worth of work suddenly thrown into question is a normal day at the office. But for Anthony, that’s not normal. And it’s not OK. The time in Jon’s lab was a year of his life, where he felt like Jon kept moving the goal posts. . . . But now, Anthony wants to know, before he starts turning his life upside down again, what will count as proof enough for Jon? How many experiments? Anthony Holland: So let’s say I do three weeks of experiment, and I only concentrate on these leukemia cells. And if I can kill at least 20% every single time, every week, will that do it? Would that be enough? Or do you want to see pancreatic die, or do you want to see—I mean, what exact buttons do I have to hit? This captures a big problem with the research enterprise, as I see it. There’s this attitude that if you can reach som
3 0.87343937 682 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-27-“The ultimate left-wing novel”
Introduction: Tyler Cowen asks what is the ultimate left-wing novel? He comes up with John Steinbeck and refers us to this list by Josh Leach that includes soclal-realist novels from around 1900. But Cowen is looking for something more “analytically or philosophically comprehensive.” My vote for the ultimate left-wing novel is 1984. The story and the political philosophy fit together well, and it’s also widely read (which is an important part of being the “ultimate” novel of any sort, I think; it wouldn’t do to choose something too obscure). Or maybe Gulliver’s Travels, but I’ve never actually read that, so I don’t know if it qualifies as being left-wing. Certainly you can’t get much more political than 1984, and I don’t think you can get much more left-wing either. (If you get any more left-wing than that, you start to loop around the circle and become right-wing. For example, I don’t think that a novel extolling the brilliance of Stalin or Mao would be considered left-wing in a modern
4 0.87312549 950 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-10-“Causality is almost always in doubt”
Introduction: Dave Backus writes: We macroeconomists are thrilled with the Nobel prize for Sargent and Sims. But on causality: they spent more time showing how hard it was to identify causality than showing how to do it. And that’s a fair assessment of our field [economics]: causality is almost always in doubt. More here . If I were in a snarky mood, I’d say something like, Causality is always in doubt in economics . . . unless you’re talking about abortion and crime, in which case you can be absolutely certain. But I’m in a good mood right now so I won’t say that. Instead I’ll just remark that, as a statistician, I’m positively thrilled that somebody named “Sims” received a major award.
Introduction: Xian pointed me to this recycling of a classic probability error. It’s too bad it was in the New York Times, but at least it was in the Opinion Pages, so I guess that’s not so bad. And, on the plus side, several of the blog commenters got the point. What I was wondering, though, was who was this “Yitzhak Melechson, a statistics professor at the University of Tel Aviv”? This is such a standard problem, I’m surprised to find a statistics professor making this mistake. I was curious what his area of research is and where he was trained. I started by googling Yitzhak Melechson but all I could find was this news story, over and over and over and over again. Then I found Tel Aviv University and navigated to its statistics department but couldn’t find any Melechson in the faculty list. Next stop: entering Melechson in the search engine at the Tel Aviv University website. It came up blank. One last try: I entered the Yitzhak Melechson into Google Scholar. Here’s what came up:
6 0.86920285 1184 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-25-Facebook Profiles as Predictors of Job Performance? Maybe…but not yet.
7 0.8691833 992 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-05-Deadwood in the math curriculum
8 0.86828846 1050 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-10-Presenting at the econ seminar
9 0.86715412 2207 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-11-My talks in Bristol this Wed and London this Thurs
11 0.86540729 925 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-26-Ethnicity and Population Structure in Personal Naming Networks
12 0.8649888 242 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-29-The Subtle Micro-Effects of Peacekeeping
13 0.86300147 2097 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-11-Why ask why? Forward causal inference and reverse causal questions
14 0.86031091 2321 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-05-On deck this week
15 0.85909832 1921 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-01-Going meta on Niall Ferguson
16 0.85867095 2164 andrew gelman stats-2014-01-09-Hermann Goering and Jane Jacobs, together at last!
17 0.85851938 1846 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-07-Like Casper the ghost, Niall Ferguson is not only white. He is also very, very adorable.
18 0.85663414 2128 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-09-How to model distributions that have outliers in one direction
19 0.85585648 1349 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-28-Question 18 of my final exam for Design and Analysis of Sample Surveys
20 0.85369283 2322 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-06-Priors I don’t believe