if anyone else has papers or projects that use rix, please let me know! in open source, people open issues to tell you when things don't work (which is fine) but sometimes, getting positive feedback is nice as well :D
Towards more reliable research: Today, together with @bihatcharite.bsky.social, we welcomed the 2025 #EinsteinFoundationAward winners: @simine.com, Maximilian Sprang, and the Brazilian Reproducibility Initiative @redebrrepro.bsky.social. A recording will be available soon.
Do you struggle with missing data in your statistical analyses? Come join our Summer School "Solving Missing Data Problems in R"! We will tell you when you can safely use complete case analysis, and when more dedicated strategies are required!
utrechtsummerschool.nl/courses/data...
Normally, I don't share preprints, but this one originated out of a special friendship: arxiv.org/abs/2603.10941
Vinícius and I never met in person. We just happened to share an interest in copulas and causal inf. This preprint is the product of almost weekly meetings talking about such stuff.
Israel just attacked a university in Beirut, Lebanon, killing a dean and a researcher. Like it did in Gaza, where it systematically bombed all universities.
I didn’t know you were here! 😅
Getting the same results (~ 0.001/3 difference) in R of a simulation done in SAS around 1998 is probably the biggest achievement of my life so far
Tbh, this takes me back to 4 years ago when I was doing my masters in psych and reading such cases in blogs/books (e.g., 7 deadly sins of psych)
This one is new to me. The answers/replies to the questions are even more intriguing
I wonder what created that 0.0001 difference
Also, reproducible through rix @brodriguesco.bsky.social
Normally, I don't share preprints, but this one originated out of a special friendship: arxiv.org/abs/2603.10941
Vinícius and I never met in person. We just happened to share an interest in copulas and causal inf. This preprint is the product of almost weekly meetings talking about such stuff.
Vin\'icius Litvinoff Justus, Felipe Fontana Vieira: Covariate-adjusted statistical dependence representation through partial copulas: bounds and new insights https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.10941 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2603.10941 https://arxiv.org/html/2603.10941
Literally this morning, my gf: If you hadn't breathed so loud, I wouldn't have had a nightmare.
Fair 😆. The ones I just looked up:
- Maximum likelihood (ML) estimation (..) part 1, 2, and 3
- ML - Cramer Rao Lower Bound Intuition
- Least squares as ML estimator (two videos)
Matrix calculus sucks
Ben Lambert has some short videos!
I am increasingly getting comfortable with the idea that estimation and uncertainty quantification can be treated in quite different ways, which would once have been quite strange to me.
I'd love to read an essay by you on this topic.
When I took a similar path, I realized the toolkits were actually chasing different abstract quantities. "Probability," it turns out, has myriad meanings, even when it refers to the same data.
Tbh, it took me a few courses and around a year to realize that a lot of it boils down to regularization/optimization. There is always the "philosophical" (broadly speaking) avenue to it, which is were I guess most "heated" stuff comes up
Does anyone know an example (paper, blog post) where frequentist and Bayesian methods lead to different conclusions?
#rstats #stats
Or an anecdote that lead you to embrace one or the other approach?
Just received a mysterious e-mail inquiring whether the silkie bantam rooster is still available and to my disappointment, this apparently is not some sort of code word.
Looks like there's another Julia Rohrer in a different part of Germany who is selling chicken.
This 21st century Fontana is confident after creating fake data already
Much of expertise in psych. comes from supposedly “data-supported” conclusions. Yet a lot of it is quite sloppy and concerning. Plus, we generally agree that statisticians shouldn’t make claims about emotions, but suddenly we accept psychologists claiming big things achieved through statistics
Tbh, I should have said “research-oriented psychologists“ (still something very general though). I also definitely believe in collaboration. However, the problem I generally see and tried to target with my statement:
But I get your point!
In psychology, we have “normalised“ too much that we “teach students to be psychologists, not statisticians“.
There are many layers to this statement. I do see your point, despite disagreeing with it. What I am wondering though: one can teach statistics through SAS/JASP/SPSS, so what exactly draws you to something like R?
