Timeline for Can there be a "new in stats" thread or wiki added somewhere here?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 10, 2023 at 11:25 | comment | added | Nick Cox | For other reasons I am excessively (in a Jane Austen sense) interested in the evolution of introductory texts. On present trends (mine and theirs) there is some predictable risk that I soon won't even be able to lift the 1000-page or so productions without risk of injury. Now it seems everything needs to be explained many times over and authors must include hundreds of exercises. Will no one go back to say a 300 page book that students are just expected to read, period? | |
| Apr 9, 2023 at 17:21 | history | edited | Silverfish | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edit in line with gung's suggestion
|
| Apr 9, 2023 at 17:16 | comment | added | Silverfish | As an example: it would be interesting to survey recent editions of the stalwart university textbooks and see what new material has come in that was only developed in the last X years. And conversely, what older material has been chopped in recent editions, particularly whether any methods are no longer given because they're now seen to be flawed or superseded. I wonder whether that's something which could be asked in an on-topic way, but I think it would be. | |
| Apr 9, 2023 at 17:12 | comment | added | Silverfish | @NickCox (+1) Yes I remain rather sceptical of what the quality of the answers might be and I do think it would benefit from a bit of time seeing how well-used the current "in thing" ends up. Nevertheless, I'm sympathetic to someone wanting to find a way to ask, in an on-topic and productive way, "it's been 20 years since I did my stats degree and I've not really been following the academic literature, has much changed that I need to know about?" | |
| Apr 9, 2023 at 10:46 | comment | added | Nick Cox | I am struggling with this idea. I don't think it is wrong in principle but if so, why don't we have examples of such questions already? One reason seems to be that this is backwards: it is about threads people want to read, but as we all know, someone has to write them. In my own field, one review journal had a class of miniature reviews supposedly focusing on "What has happened very recently in subfield X?" but that only worked well when people subverted it. All too often papers seemed like silly articles on fashion, about what is trending up this season, usually the reviewer's own work! | |
| Apr 9, 2023 at 0:27 | comment | added | gung - Reinstate Monica | Those are decent suggetions, @Silverfish. I think, eg, asking for the most highly cited papers on a given topic within a given time period might work, but it still strikes me as a little dicey. I can still easily imagine such a question being shot down. If the blog could be brought back, that would probably be the best venue for this sort of thing. Otherwise, posting a link to a new paper you like, w/ a promotional blurb, is likely the way to go. | |
| Apr 8, 2023 at 21:39 | comment | added | Silverfish |
@gung Wikipedia also has rules against opinion-based content; they don't have an article on "the best films ever" but do have List of films considered the best. Another option here would be ask "what developments in topic X in time period Y have been considered most important?" Sometimes particular developments get praised as breakthroughs, win awards, or get cited in articles like "Ten Most Important Accomplishments in Risk Analysis, 1980–2010"
|
|
| Apr 8, 2023 at 20:09 | comment | added | Silverfish | @gung One option (and why I suggested doing this in retrospect, which is still useful for someone who wants to "catch up" with modern-ish developments rather than wanting to be at the very cutting edge) is to ask for most highly cited papers. | |
| Apr 8, 2023 at 12:02 | comment | added | gung - Reinstate Monica | Those questions would be the way to go, but they would probably be closed as opinion based. I don't see an option within the CV system to make this work. | |
| Apr 7, 2023 at 13:39 | comment | added | Shawn Hemelstrand | I really like this idea | |
| Apr 7, 2023 at 8:58 | history | answered | Silverfish | CC BY-SA 4.0 |