Skip to content
Archive of entries posted by

These are the statistics papers you just have to read

Here. And here. Just kidding. Here’s the real story. Susanna Makela writes: A few of us want to start a journal club for the statistics PhD students. The idea is to read important papers that we might not otherwise read, maybe because they’re not directly related to our area of research/we don’t have time/etc. What […]

George Carlin (2) vs. Barbara Kruger

To decide yesterday‘s contest, I’ll have to point to Jeremy’s comment: Rembrandt in a walk: -He believes that “God is in every leaf on every tree”. Most of his greatest paintings are portraits of himself or regular people (as opposed to portraits of kings or Popes, or mythical battles, or etc.) Same for his etchings. […]

One simple trick to make Stan run faster

Did you know that Stan automatically runs in parallel (and caches compiled models) from R if you do this: source(“”) It’s from Stan core developer Ben Goodrich. This simple line of code has changed my life. A factor-of-4 speedup might not sound like much, but, believe me, it is!

Rembrandt van Rijn (2) vs. Bertrand Russell

For yesterday, the most perceptive comment came from Slugger: Rabbit Angstrom is a perfect example of the life that the Buddha warns against. He is a creature of animal passions who never gains any enlightenment. In any case, I think we can all agree that Buddha is a far more interesting person than Updike. But, […]

What hypothesis testing is all about. (Hint: It’s not what you think.)

I’ve said it before but it’s worth saying again. The conventional view: Hyp testing is all about rejection. The idea is that if you reject the null hyp at the 5% level, you have a win, you have learned that a certain null model is false and science has progressed, either in the glamorous “scientific […]

On deck this week

Mon: What hypothesis testing is all about. (Hint: It’s not what you think.) Rembrandt van Rijn (2) vs. Betrand Russell Tues: One simple trick to make Stan run faster George Carlin (2) vs. Barbara Kruger Wed: I actually think this infographic is ok Bernard-Henry Levy (3) vs. Jacques Derrida Thurs: Defaults, once set, are hard […]

Buddha (3) vs. John Updike

Yesterday‘s winner is Friedrich Nietzsche. I don’t really have much to say here: there was lots of enthusiasm about the philosopher and none at all for the cozy comedian. Maybe Jonathan Miller would’ve been a better choice. Now for today’s battle. Buddha is seeded #3 among founders of religions. Updike is the unseeded author of […]

“Precise Answers to the Wrong Questions”

Our friend K? (not to be confused with X) seeks pre-feedback on this talk: Can we get a mathematical framework for applying statistics that better facilitates communication with non-statisticians as well as helps statisticians avoid getting “precise answers to the wrong questions*”? Applying statistics involves communicating with non-statisticians so that we grasp their applied problems […]

Friedrich Nietzsche (4) vs. Alan Bennett

William Shakespeare had the most support yesterday; for example, from David: “I vote for Shakespeare just to see who actually shows up.” The best argument of the serious variety came from Babar, who wrote, “I would vote for WS. Very little is known about the man. I care very little about Marx’s mannerisms but I’d […]

Bertrand Russell goes to the IRB

Jonathan Falk points me to this genius idea from Eric Crampton: Here’s a fun one for those of you still based at a university. All of you put together a Human Ethics Review proposal for a field experiment on Human Ethics Review proposals. Here is the proposal within my proposal. Each of you would propose […]