Blog · corpus.blog/blogs/statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/posts
Andrew Gelman
statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu
2020
18 Jul 2020
Dispelling confusion about MRP (multilevel regression and poststratification) for survey analysisoriginal ↗
17 Jul 2020
Association Between Universal Curve Fitting in a Health Care Journal and Journal Acceptance Among Health Care Researchersoriginal ↗
17 Jul 2020
What can be our goals, and what is too much to hope for, regarding robust statistical procedures?original ↗
16 Jul 2020
16 Jul 2020
If variation in effects is so damn important and so damn obvious, why do we hear so little about it?original ↗
13 Jul 2020
“To Change the World, Behavioral Intervention Research Will Need to Get Serious About Heterogeneity”original ↗
13 Jul 2020
12 Jul 2020
Blog about a column about the Harper’s letter: Here’s some discourse about a discourse about what happens when the discourse takes precedence over realityoriginal ↗
11 Jul 2020
11 Jul 2020
10 Jul 2020
8 Jul 2020
7 Jul 2020
6 Jul 2020
New England Journal of Medicine engages in typical academic corporate ass-covering behaviororiginal ↗
5 Jul 2020
2 Jul 2020
Embracing Variation and Accepting Uncertainty (my talk this Wed/Tues at a symposium on communicating uncertainty)original ↗
30 Jun 2020
29 Jun 2020
“Why do the results of immigrant students depend so much on their country of origin and so little on their country of destination?”original ↗
26 Jun 2020
25 Jun 2020
Stacking for Non-mixing Bayesian Computations: The Curse and Blessing of Multimodal Posteriorsoriginal ↗
24 Jun 2020
Resolving confusions over that study of “Teacher Effects on Student Achievement and Height”original ↗
23 Jun 2020
22 Jun 2020
Against overly restrictive definitions: No, I don’t think it helps to describe Bayes as “the analysis of subjective
beliefs” (nor, for that matter, does it help to characterize the statements of Krugman or Mankiw as not being “economics”)original ↗
21 Jun 2020
20 Jun 2020
Do we really believe the Democrats have an 88% chance of winning the presidential election?original ↗
19 Jun 2020
“Laplace’s Demon: A Seminar Series about Bayesian Machine Learning at Scale” and my answers to their questionsoriginal ↗
18 Jun 2020
18 Jun 2020
17 Jun 2020
The point here is not the face masks; it’s the impossibility of assumption-free causal inference when the different treatments are entangled in this way.original ↗
17 Jun 2020
17 Jun 2020
16 Jun 2020
Challenges to the Reproducibility of Machine Learning Models in Health Care; also a brief discussion about not overrating randomized clinical trialsoriginal ↗
14 Jun 2020
Fake MIT journalists misrepresent real Buzzfeed journalist. (Maybe we shouldn’t be so surprised?)original ↗
13 Jun 2020
13 Jun 2020
12 Jun 2020
Faster than ever before: Hamiltonian Monte Carlo using an adjoint-differentiated Laplace approximationoriginal ↗
10 Jun 2020
8 Jun 2020
7 Jun 2020
Thank you, James Watson. Thank you, Peter Ellis. (Lancet: You should do the right thing and credit them for your retraction. Actually, do one better and invite them to write a joint editorial in your journal.)original ↗
4 Jun 2020
Association for Psychological Science claims that they can “add our voice and expertise to bring about positive change and to stand against injustice and racism in all forms” . . . but I’m skeptical.original ↗
4 Jun 2020
3 Jun 2020
Can someone build a Bayesian tool that takes into account your symptoms and where you live to estimate your probability of having coronavirus?original ↗
3 Jun 2020
2 Jun 2020
Statistical Workflow and the Fractal Nature of Scientific Revolutions (my talk this Wed at the Santa Fe Institute)original ↗
1 Jun 2020
This one’s for the Lancet editorial board: A trolley problem for our times (involving a plate of delicious cookies and a steaming pile of poop)original ↗
1 Jun 2020
“Note sure what the lesson for data analysis quality control is here is here, but interesting to wonder about how that mistake was not caught pre-publication.”original ↗
31 May 2020
31 May 2020
“The good news about this episode is that it’s kinda shut up those people who were criticizing that Stanford antibody study because it was an un-peer-reviewed preprint. . . .” and a P.P.P.S. with Paul Alper’s line about the dead horseoriginal ↗
30 May 2020
29 May 2020
An open letter expressing concerns regarding the statistical analysis and data integrity of a recently published and publicized paperoriginal ↗
28 May 2020
28 May 2020
27 May 2020