Skip to content
Archive of entries posted by

It seemed to me that most destruction was being done by those who could not choose between the two

Amateurs, dilettantes, hacks, cowboys, clones — Nick Cave [Note from Dan 11Sept: I wanted to leave some clear air after the StanCon reminder, so I scheduled this post for tomorrow. Which means you get two posts (one from me, one from Andrew) on this in two days. That’s probably more than the gay face study deserves.] […]

Touch me, I want to feel your data.

(This is not a paper we wrote by mistake.) (This is also not Andrew) (This is also really a blog about an aspect of the paper, which mostly focusses on issues around visualisation and how visualisation can improve workflow. So you should read it.) Recently Australians have been living through a predictably ugly debate around […]

(It’s never a) Total Eclipse of the Prior

(This is not by Andrew) This is a paper we (Gelman, Simpson, Betancourt) wrote by mistake. The paper in question, recently arXiv’d, is called “The prior can generally only be understood in the context of the likelihood”. How the sausage was made Now, to be very clear (and because I’ve been told since I moved […]