Please post your tag synonym suggestions as new answers in this thread, one answer per suggestion. Upvote answers where you believe that the suggested tags should be made synonyms, and downvote answers where you believe the tags should remain separate. Well upvoted suggestions will be eventually implemented by the moderators (and then the corresponding answers will be deleted).
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
1
asked Jun 7, 2012 at 16:45
-
1$\begingroup$ Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. $\endgroup$– whuber ModCommented Jan 21, 2016 at 14:55
Add a comment
|
8 Answers
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
2
I have just introduced a tag predictability and would like it to be merged with forecastability. This is for improving searches. E.g. today I was looking for something about predictability and was not able to find anything under the (then nonexistent) tag predictability. I was quite sure the tag existed but it did not. Turns out I had forgotten that the relevant existing tag was forecastability.
-
1$\begingroup$ I am fine with this, but
[predictability]seems broader than[forecastability]. There is a sense that the mapping should go the other way around, but[f]is already well established. $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 30 at 11:41 -
1$\begingroup$ @gung-ReinstateMonica, I agree that
[predictability]seems broader than[forecastability], so the former could well be the main tag and the latter its synonym, even though the latter has been more widely used until now. $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 30 at 11:59
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
4
survey-sampling (wiki, 162q)
polling (no wiki, 45q)
answered Feb 9, 2021 at 2:41
-
1
-
3$\begingroup$ We also have voting-system which is distinct and for which I have just proposed wiki info. $\endgroup$– mdeweyCommented Feb 9, 2021 at 15:28
-
2$\begingroup$ Looking at this again I see we also have survey-weights which I would have thought was a proper subset of survey-sampling $\endgroup$– mdeweyCommented Mar 6, 2021 at 13:41
-
2$\begingroup$ @mdewey: I think I will ask this as an independent question, to get more people involved. Seems complicated! $\endgroup$– kjetil b halvorsen ModCommented Mar 8, 2021 at 2:02
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
bounds (272, wiki) $\leftarrow$ boundary (7, no wiki)
bounds (272, wiki) $\leftarrow$ tail-bound (14, no wiki)
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
4
There seems to be a fair bit of overlap between:
p-value (2573) and statistical-significance (5,774)
And the usage of hypothesis-testing (9591) overlaps a fair bit as well, though in principle it does differ more.
Is there a case for merging the first two? And perhaps editing the tag info for the third to make a distinction?
-
1$\begingroup$
ssvshthas been discussed before. I see a subtle distinction, but that doesn't mean they will be used well by typical askers.pv->ssmay be a viable merge. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 15, 2022 at 13:57 -
$\begingroup$ I'm not sure here ... why is p-values more related to statistical significance than to hypothesis testing? By the way, p-values have their own existence, now, without regard to where they come from ... and some uses of p-values can be seen as descriptive. $\endgroup$– kjetil b halvorsen ModCommented Jul 19, 2022 at 17:12
-
1$\begingroup$ @kjetilbhalvorsen To your first point, Bayesian hypothesis testing exists although I doubt it appears often in questions with that tag. And as for the second, I'd be curious to see if that is a common view. I would have thought statistical significance and p-values would be hard to divorce from each other. To me, they seem much closer to each other than to hypothesis testing (which could itself be made a synonym quite reasonably, I think). $\endgroup$– mktCommented Jul 19, 2022 at 17:29
-
1$\begingroup$ All reasonable comments, I will think more about this and come back later ... we could also compare posts under the tags and see if there is much sign of difference in use ... $\endgroup$– kjetil b halvorsen ModCommented Jul 19, 2022 at 17:33
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
4
feature-scaling (120 posts, no wiki) must be synonymous to either normalization or standardization (both with wikis), or both ... ?
answered Feb 21, 2022 at 1:16
-
6$\begingroup$ Scaling seems more generic. Maybe
[n]&[st]should be grouped under[fs], & we could even create a[centering]tag to be a synonym as well? Dunno what's best here... We probably don't need 3 tags for this, though. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 24, 2022 at 14:00 -
$\begingroup$ @gung-ReinstateMonica Is centering the same thing as scaling? I always thought scaling was a specific application of the multiplication function, but centering is a specific application of the addition function. (Leaving aside that multiplication itself is repeated addition. :) Do you have a new insight for me, gung? $\endgroup$– AlexisCommented Jun 12, 2022 at 3:32
-
1$\begingroup$ here is my standard answer on the specific use of these terms, @Alexis, but I'm guessing
fsis a generic term. I think these should be grouped together somehow, but how best to do it is unclear to me. The best superset name would probably belinear-transformation, but that doesn't seem like it would be a good choice for our situation. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 12, 2022 at 11:47 -
1$\begingroup$ I agree with gung --
[normalization]$\to$[feature-scaling]and[standardization]$\to$[feature-scaling]seems like the better solution. $\endgroup$– Sycorax ModCommented Jun 2, 2023 at 20:07
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
8
There are now two tags, pre-post-comparison and change-scores essentially covering the same topic. I propose we let pre-post-comparison be the main one (even if is is newer and less used), as it is the most general one.
answered Aug 21, 2022 at 17:43
-
1$\begingroup$ (+1) I recently created
pre-post-comparisonbecause, as you note, there are several closely related topics (with quite a few threads) that are not covered by the much more specificchange-scores. $\endgroup$– mktCommented Aug 21, 2022 at 17:51 -
$\begingroup$ I've come across questions under the
mixed-modeltag that might be appropriately tagged withpre-post-comparisontoo. But the terms "pre-post" (and variants) don't appear in the body of the question because the OP didn't think about it: 1. And here is a simplyregressionexample: 2. It maybe challenging to apply thepre-post-comparisonconsistently? Or perhaps I misunderstand its application? $\endgroup$– dipetkovCommented Aug 21, 2022 at 18:40 -
4$\begingroup$ @dipetkov I frequently add relevant tags that the OP missed or is unaware of (often because they're unaware of the terminology). I also leave a comment suggesting that they look at the top questions in the tag if it's a question that is likely to have been addressed previously. $\endgroup$– mktCommented Aug 21, 2022 at 19:42
-
2$\begingroup$ To my mind, change scores & pre-post comparisons are (at least subtly) different things. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 21, 2022 at 20:17
-
1$\begingroup$ @gung: They are certainly subtly different, I see that change-scores is a subset of pre-post-, and for a long time that tag has been used that way. See its tag wiki $\endgroup$– kjetil b halvorsen ModCommented Aug 21, 2022 at 21:21
-
1$\begingroup$ @gung: I still thinks that for the purpose of organizing posts here, it is better to synonimize. What do you think? $\endgroup$– kjetil b halvorsen ModCommented Oct 31, 2022 at 1:17
-
$\begingroup$ @kjetilbhalvorsen, to me they are at least subtly different. However, I didn't downvote this suggestion or give a firm thumbs-down. So if others are going for it, I'm not stopping it. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 31, 2022 at 13:46
-
$\begingroup$ I've changed my mind on this. I think both tags can live - there are enough questions specifically about change scores that it's probably worth retaining. $\endgroup$– mktCommented Oct 18 at 10:35
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
4
regression (30258 threads) $\leftarrow$ regression-strategies (304 threads)
117 out of the 304 regression-strategies threads are also tagged regression, including many of the most upvoted ones.
The regression-strategies usage guidance is presently:
Regression Modeling Strategies
And the tag info is:
The purpose of this category is to refer to questions and discussions about regression modeling strategies, especially when multiple methods are being combined. For example how much data reduction should be done before using 𝑌 ? What is best practice for model validation for specific model types? How does the choice of predictive accuracy measures impact model validation? How should parameters be assigned for various parts of a model, and how does the number of parameters assigned to one part of the model affect the number of parameters to assign to another part? What is the best way to detect that parameters in a model are hard to disentangle and how could pre-modeling data reduction have helped? What is a good strategy for getting a complex model accepted by non-statisticians? When does one use traditional multivariable regression modeling vs. a black box?
This seems broad enough that it might as well be merged with regression. What do you all think?
-
2$\begingroup$ I think Frank Harrell created that (or maybe someone created it for him) because there are a lot of questions about the techniques and/or philosophy in his book, Regression Modeling Strategies. Certainly, these questions will often pertain to regression, but I think it is distinct enough to retain. The excerpt could be improved, though. I'll do that now. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 8 at 12:31
-
1$\begingroup$ I however agree with mkt that, as far as the tag info is concerned, it's pretty broad and currently encompasses what the general tag covers too. If that was meant for Harrell's book only, the tag info needs to be revamped too. Personally, I am not too much in favor of creating a tag solely to cater a book, but again, I am not disagreeing there is a pretty good flow of questions that take inspiration from the book. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 9 at 2:00
-
$\begingroup$ @gung-ReinstateMonica Thanks, that connection was not clear to me. Or to other users, I think, as many of the recent questions are quite general and don't seem to refer to a specific book. If it's to be retained, perhaps it would help to change it to something like "regression-strategies-book" ? Quite a few people ignore tag usage guidance, unfortunately. $\endgroup$– mktCommented Sep 12 at 6:56
-
1$\begingroup$ @mkt, it's true, unfortunately, that many people don't read the excerpts, but some do & it will be easier for regular users such as yourself to recognize & correct misuse going forward. If you just want to change the tag's name, that's fine with me, although I don't know what the character limit is (that's 26). $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 12 at 11:43
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
1
variational-bayes $\leftarrow$ variational-inference
variational-bayes: 394Q, has excerpt & wiki.variational-inference(has a synomym: variational): 103Q, no excerpt or wiki
