July 2011 Archives

Styles of statistical inference

| No Comments | No TrackBacks
Share |
Remember awhile back when I went on too long about Bayesian inference. Well, if you'd like a gentle introduction to different approaches to statistical inference, I recently ran across a page entitled "Statistics for experimental biologists" that gives a fairly decent overview of the major approaches you'll encounter as a practicing scientist. I have some quibbles with it,1 but its brief summary of some problems with the traditional hypothesis-testing approach is worth repeating:

  • The p-value doesn't tell scientists what they want (it is the probability of the data given that H0 is true, and scientists would like the probability of H0 or H1 given the data)
  • H0 is often known to be false
  • P-values are widely misunderstood
  • Leads to binary yes/no thinking
  • Prior information is never taken into account (Bayesian argument)
  • A small p-value could reflect a very large sample size rather than a meaningful difference
  • Leads to publication bias, because significant results (i.e. p < 0.05) are more likely to be published

Are you hungry?

| No Comments | No TrackBacks
Share |
Cookies for science nerds. But do you see a problem? Scroll down to the bottom to see my complaint.

There's no biology there! Well, almost no biology. There is one flower. We have four beakers, four test tubes, two, atoms, a couple of radio waves, and something in the top left corner that I can't identify, but only one flower to represent biology. No DNA, no chromosomes, no animals. That's what's wrong with this picture. (And don't get me started on why there's no geology.)

Off to South Africa

| No Comments | 2 TrackBacks
Share |
CarlsonHolsingerPrunier_cover.jpgI catch a plane from Bradley International later today. About 25 hours later (after connections at Dulles and Johannesburg and a stopover in Dakar), I'll land in Cape Town. Then I'll be in the Western Cape (getting into the Eastern Cape briefly at Baviaanskloof) for the next month.

I'm part of the team collecting samples and measuring traits of Protea and Pelargonium as part of our Dimensions of Biodiversity project (see also the project wiki for more information). The community ecology team has been "in country" (at Baviaanskloof) since early July.

For most of the time we're in South Africa, we'll be staying in self-catering cottages. I haven't checked, but I doubt that any of them have Internet access. I will have my Blackberry, but I can't make blog posts from it. I will post an occasional tweet, which you can either find by following me (@keholsinger) or by searching for the hastag #dimensionsSA.

If I have time when I find an Internet cafe, you may find one or two posts here between now and when I return to the U.S. on August 16th. But don't count on it.

Stealing isn't open access

| No Comments | 1 TrackBack
Share |
Aaron Swartz at a Creative Commons event.

Image via Wikipedia

Aaron Swartz, a 24-year-old programmer and online political activist, has been indicted in Boston on charges that he stole more than four million documents from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and JSTOR, an archive of scientific journals and academic papers. (Read the full indictment below.)

Mr. Swartz was indicted last Thursday by the United States Attorney for the District of Massachusetts, Carmen M. Ortiz, and the indictment was unsealed Tuesday. The charges could result in up to 35 years in prison and a $1 million fine. ("Internet activist charged in M.I.T. data theft," by Nick Bilton, The New York Times, 19 July 2011).

In case you don't know, JSTOR is a non-profit organization that provides online access to scholarly journal articles in a wide variety of fields, everything from African-American studies (17 titles) to zoology (65 titles). It is an invaluable resource, and I use it frequently.1

But it isn't free.

I don't know how much UConn or other institutions pay for access, but the fees they pay are how JSTOR is able to scan old titles, run them through OCR, post them and new articles on servers, and maintain the servers. It costs money to provide those services, and subscriptions provide that money.

I wish it were possible for all scholarly literature to be freely available without charge.2 But until someone figures out how to provide the funds necessary to make that possible, subscriptions will be necessary. And make no mistake. If Swartz did what he is accused of doing, he clearly broke the terms and conditions for use of JSTOR. I'll leave it to lawyers to determine whether his actions fit the legal definition of stealing, but if he did download more than four million articles from JSTOR, I will regard him as a crook.

Plants are cool

| No Comments | No TrackBacks
Share |
Chris Martine got his degree in this department a few years ago. As you can see, he thinks plants are cool. I agree. The video gives one example of why.



I do have one complaint.The title should have been Plants are cool!, not Plants are cool too!Adding the word "too" makes it sounds as if plants are playing catchup with animals, which is wrong. Plants are much cooler than animals.

There are more videos from Botany 2011 on the BotanyConference video channel at YouTube, including Peter Raven's plenary address.

Good news for a change

| No Comments | No TrackBacks
Share |
January 2011 - Vacation on Grand Cayman - The ...

Image by pmarkham via Flickr

Mostly the news about endangered species is bad. Senators and congressmen insert riders that remove protection for them into appropriations bills, introduce legislation that would prohibit their listing, or they simply refuse to provide funding for the activities necessary to list and protect them. So it's nice when I can point out some good news.

One Caribbean species, the Blue Iguana of Grand Cayman island, found nowhere else in the world, is looking like that rarest of things, a threatened species roaring back from the brink. Once down to perhaps fewer than a dozen animals, the long-tailed lizards, some growing to 5 feet and weighing 30 pounds, now number about 500, suggests a tally from a weeklong health screening that ended July 3.
Read the whole story at USA Today.

NSF merit review criteria

| No Comments | No TrackBacks
Share |
The National Science Foundation uses two criteria to judge proposals: intellectual merit and broader impacts. Over the past year, the National Science Board has conducted a review of those criteria. They recently published a draft revision of those criteria, and comments were due on 14 July. The Botanical Society of America and the American Society of Plant Taxonomists submitted a joint letter commenting on the draft (PDF), and the American Institute of Biological Sciences submitted a separate letter.

I have to brag a little

| No Comments | No TrackBacks
Share |
If you've been reading this blog for awhile, you know that I have a Garmin wristwatch that tracks my time and distance. I had a really nice run this morning, and I have to brag a little about it: 6.24 miles in 48:51, an average of 7:49 per mile. And there's a pretty significant hill on this route.1Not too bad for someone who will turn 55 in a few months.

Piled high and deeper

| No Comments | 1 TrackBack
Share |
From the creator of Ph.D. Comics comes The Ph.D. Movie

A young botanist at UConn

| 1 Comment | 1 TrackBack
Share |
nikisha-patel.png

Photo by Sean Flynn from UConn Today

Nikisha Patel1 is one of about 30 undergraduate students who received the Young Botanist Award from the Botanical Society of America this year. Her research involves reproductive biology of a rare plant in the genus Solanum.

Next week Nikisha leaves with a group of us for fieldwork in South Africa associated with our Dimensions of Biodiversity project on Protea, Pelargonium, and plant community diversity in the Cape Floristic Region.

You can read more about Nikisha in an article from UConn Today, and you can see the full list of Young Botanists at the BSA website.

Worst PowerPoint slides

| No Comments | No TrackBacks
Share |
PowerPoint can be really awful, but I've seen few slides as bad as those that won InFocus Labs' Worst PPT Slide Contest. Here's the first prize winner:

PPT_broegge.jpg
Nancy Duarte has a short commentary on the results that's worth reading.

Investing in science

| No Comments | No TrackBacks
Share |
Last February, students in the Botanical Society of America and other organizations wrote an open letter to policymakers.

As future scientists and educators, we, the undersigned students, encourage Congress and the President to make sustained investments in the nation's scientific research, education, and training programs. The extramural, competitive, peer-reviewed grant programs administered by federal agencies are critical to our nation's scientific enterprise and future.

...

Addressing the nation's current budget challenges is essential, but we must not sacrifice investments in our future. One way to grow our economy is through scientific innovation. Science, however, cannot move forward in an environment where one year brings a rapid budget increase and the next year a precipitous budget cut. Research and development require people, facilities, and equipment - recruiting, retaining, and building this infrastructure requires a sustained and predictable investment.
As of June, nearly 2800 students had signed the letter. If you are a student and you have not yet signed the letter, I encourage you to visit the AIBS website, read the letter, and sign it.

De-funding endangered species listing

| No Comments | No TrackBacks
Share |
First we had the rider to the appropriations bill for this year that delisted the northern Rockies population of gray wolves.1 Then we had efforts to block listing of the dunes sagebrush lizard. Now Ken Cole points out a paragraph buried in the House Interior-Environment appropriations bill.

UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
For necessary expenses of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, as authorized by law, and for scientific and economic studies, general administration, and the performance of other authorized functions related to such resources, $1,099,055,000, to remain available until September 30, 2013 except as otherwise provided herein: Provided, That none of the funds shall be used for implementing subsections (a), (b), (c), and (e) of section 4 of the Endangered Species Act, (except for processing petitions, developing and issuing proposed and final regulations, and taking any other steps to implement actions described in subsection (c)(2)(A), (c)(2)(B)(i), or (c)(2)(B)(ii) of such section):
If you're like me, you won't have a clue what that means until someone explains it to you. Ken points out that this would have the effect of providing FWS with funds only to delist species, not to list them.

Here's a brief outline of what sections (a), (b), (c), and (e) of Section 4 provide for. Remember, I am not a lawyer. This a layperson's reading, but here goes.

(a) Gives the Secretaries of Interior and Commerce authority to determine whether species are threatened or endangered.
(b) Describes the basis for determining whether species are threatened or endangered and for designation of critical habitat.
(c) Provides for changes in the list of threatened and endangered species. The only part funded under the House Interior-Environment appropriations bill are those that would allow species to be removed from the list or to have their status changed from endangered to threatened.
(e) Provides for protection in "similarity of appearance" cases, i.e., where a threatened or endangered species might be confused with one that is not listed.
Anyone who supports this bill cannot claim they are concerned about loss of biodiversity.

Social science funding at NSF

| No Comments | 1 TrackBack
Share |
National Science Foundation (NSF) Logo, reprod...

Image via Wikipedia

A couple of years ago, Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) had a dumb idea. He proposed an amendment that would have eliminated social science funding at the National Science Foundation. The amendment was soundly defeated, but 36 senators voted in favor of the Coburn amendment.

In late May, Coburn returned and upped the ante. He released a report accusing NSF of mishandling nearly $3 billion. Of course, he was wrong. I can't link to all of the posts explaining why, but you'll find some a few of the more relevant links at the bottom of this post.

In Friday's New York Times, David Brooks does a good job of explaining why "[t]his is exactly how budgets should not be balanced -- by cutting cheap things that produce enormous future benefits." You should go read the whole thing for yourself, but here's how it starts:

Over the past 50 years, we've seen a number of gigantic policies produce disappointing results -- policies to reduce poverty, homelessness, dropout rates, single-parenting and drug addiction. Many of these policies failed because they were based on an overly simplistic view of human nature. They assumed that people responded in straightforward ways to incentives. Often, they assumed that money could cure behavior problems.

Fortunately, today we are in the middle of a golden age of behavioral research. Thousands of researchers are studying the way actual behavior differs from the way we assume people behave. They are coming up with more accurate theories of who we are, and scores of real-world applications. (emphasis added)
Scientific research often sounds funny because the technical detail needed for full understanding requires years of training. Coburn1 doesn't provide the context for the funny-sounding research he describes. When you know the context, it sounds a lot less funny. In fact, it sounds pretty important, and you can often imagine real-world applications quite easily.

More on commas

| No Comments | No TrackBacks
Share |
I know. I know. I should get a life. But I get worked up about commas, because I care about precision. So does Philip Corbett, who posts weekly on grammar and style for the New York Times. Last week his post pointed out a bunch of errors in comma usage that made their way into the published version of various articles.

Interestingly, in his first complaint he cites Garner's Modern American Usage as support for his advice that a comma should separate introductory phrases of more than three words from the main clause of a sentence. I say "interestingly", because if you go to the accompanying FAQs on Style and scroll down to the question "Where's the comma?", this is what you'll find.

Many readers complain about what they view as a missing comma in a sentence like this: He bought apples, pears and bananas.

Style guides for book and academic publishing generally would insist on another comma after "pears," the so-called serial comma. But news writing has traditionally omitted the serial comma -- perhaps seeking a more rapid feeling in the prose, or perhaps to save time and effort in the old days of manual typesetting.

We do use the additional comma in cases where a sentence would be awkward or confusing without it: Choices for breakfast included oatmeal, muffins, and bacon and eggs.
Those complaining readers are the same ones who rose up in arms on Twitter when it was (wrongly) reported that Oxford was giving up its comma. And Garner would be one of those readers. Quoting from my copy of Garner:

Whether to include the serial comma has sparked many arguments. But it's easily answered in favor of inclusion because omitting the final comma may cause ambiguity, where as including it never will.
Mr. Corbett, I suggest that you, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Associated Press, and all of your fellows follow Mr. Garner's advice.


Meet me in St. Louis

| No Comments | No TrackBacks
Share |
botany-2011.jpgNo, really. I mean it. I'm on my way to St. Louis for Botany 2011, the annual meetings of the Botanical Society of America, the American Society of Plant Taxonomists, the American Fern Society, and the Society for Economic Botany. There are 12 talks by folks from the University of Connecticut, including two talks by my student Kathryn (one on her dissertation work on Aeranthes henricii and one on a side project on Polygonum cespitosum). There's also an informal breakfast get together for anyone who's been associated with UConn in any way Tuesday from 7:00-8:00 in the Eau Bistro at the Chase Park Plaza. Please stop by and say "Hi" even if you can't stay long.

There isn't an "official" Twitter hashtag for Botany 2011. The BSA staff will be posting using @Botany_ . I'll try to tweet at least once or twice a day using the #botany2011 hashtag, and I'll try to recruit a few people to join me.

Something I don't need

| No Comments | No TrackBacks
Share |
But maybe (if you are really into movies) you do...


Update: In case it's not obvious. The video illustrates an iPhone app that uses the built in camera to "see" where it is and paste in the "appropriate" scene from a movie.

The theory that would not die

| No Comments | 2 TrackBacks
Share |
theory-would-not-die.jpg And you thought that Bayesian statistics were just for inferring phylogenies, species distribution, population genetics parameters, and various kinds of equally arcane social science type stuff. Well, think again.

The review in the New Scientist confuses Bayes' Theorem1 and Bayesian inference In a way that I presume the book doesn't, but it concludes:

[T]o have crafted a page-turner out of the history of statistics is an impressive feat.
Indeed. I can imagine it being a page-turner for a stats geek like me, but David Robson doesn't sound like a stats geek. If Sharon Bertsch McGrayne really turned a history of Bayesian inference into something that more normal people find interesting, she's accomplished a task many of us would envy.

If you're wondering what the review (I hope not the book) got wrong about Bayes' Theorem versus Bayesian inference, read on.

Rumana Monzur returns to Vancouver

| No Comments | No TrackBacks
Share |
Rumana Monzur is a Master's student at the University of British Columbia and a native of Bangladesh. She returned to Bangladesh to visit her family, and when she was about to return, her husband gouged her eyes and bit off part of her nose. She has now returned to Vancouver.

With her severely injured eyes covered by dark glasses and her dreams brutally derailed, Rumana Monzur returned on Tuesday to Vancouver, where she wept as she spoke of her hopes for the future.

...

"It's so different - but it feels great to be here among all you beautiful people," Ms. Monzur said, speaking through tears as her father gripped the handles of her wheelchair. "And I want to see you beautiful people again. I really do." ("UBC student maimed in Bangladesh attack returns to Vancouver", by Wendy Stueck, The Globe and Mail, 6 July 2011)


R and LinkedIn

| No Comments | No TrackBacks
Share |
Image representing LinkedIn as depicted in Cru...

Image via CrunchBase

You may have noticed the LinkedIn badge to the right. I am on LinkedIn,1 although I still don't really get the whole "social networking" thing.2 It's more likely that you will have noticed that I use R for most of my statistical analyses. If you're on LinkedIn and interested in R, you may want to join the R Project for Statistical Computing group on LinkedIn. I just joined yesterday, so I can't tell you much about what you'll learn from being part of it, but it looks as if it may be useful.

Moss in northeastern CT

| No Comments | No TrackBacks
Share |
If you happen to live (or visit) northeastern Connecticut and if you enjoy walks in the woods, there's a small brochure you may want to get a copy of:

A visit to the miniature forest: Insights into the biology and evolution of bryophytes in northeastern Connecticut

It was written by Jon Swanson (a teacher at E.O. Smith High School in Mansfield), Jessica Budke (a graduate student in my department), and Bernard Goffinet. You can download the PDF for free and print it yourself or contact Bernard Goffinet to order a printed copy for a small fee.

How many people will there be?

| No Comments | No TrackBacks
Share |
20110503_POPULATION_graphic-popup-v2.jpg

Graphic from the New York Times

Fred Pearce criticized a report from the Population Division of the United Nations that was released in May. The report projected that the world population would reach 10 billion by the end of this century. He complained that the new projections were almost entirely driven by a change in fertility assumptions.

In last week's Nature, Hania Zlotnik, Director of the Population Division, responds to Pearce's criticism. She disputes Pearce's claim that differences are due to revisions in fertility estimates.

I am not an expert, and I'm more than willing to be corrected, but I find Zlotnik's response persuasive. But the most important point is the one she makes in her concluding paragraph:

The medium variant of the 2010 revision produces a 2050 world population that is, as Pearce notes, 156 million higher than that projected in the 2008 revision. This 1.7% difference is comparable to that between earlier revisions produced during this decade.
Two things are important about that paragraph:

  1. Pearce and Zlotnik agree that the projection for 2050 is 156 million higher than in the 2008 revision.
  2. That difference amounts to only 1.7 percent of the total expected (roughly 9 billion).
As I said at the time:

Since the projections don't diverge until after 2050, it may not make much of a difference to policy makers in any context. Even long-term projections for social insurance programs like Medicare and Medicaid in the U.S. don't go out beyond 2050. By the time we need accurate projections for 2100, we'll be a lot closer to it, and small differences in fertility rates will have far less of an impact on those projections.
We need to focus now on how we'll deal with 9 billion people in 2050, not on whether there will be 10 billion in 2100

Harassing climate scientists

| 1 Comment | No TrackBacks
Share |
The attorney general of Virginia sued the University of Virginia about a year ago for access to materials related to Michael Mann's research when he was on the faculty there. The Board of the American Association for the Advancement of Sciences adopted a statement urging the Attorney General either to justify his suit or to end it.

A judge threw out the suit. But that's not the end of it.

In January, the American Tradition Institute Environmental Law Center filed a Freedom of Information Act request "documents, including e-mails Mann exchanged with other scientists while employed at the university". Since the University of Virginia is a public institution, it must comply with the request, and it will provide the material by mid-August.

Here's part of what the Washington Post's editorial board has to say about the FOIA request:

Going after Mr. Mann only discourages the sort of scientific inquiry that, over time, sorts out fact from speculation, good science from bad. Academics must feel comfortable sharing research, disagreeing with colleagues and proposing conclusions -- not all of which will be correct -- without fear that those who dislike their findings will conduct invasive fishing expeditions in search of a pretext to discredit them. That give-and-take should be unhindered by how popular a professor's ideas are or whose ideological convictions might be hurt.
The board of AAAS agrees:

Scientific progress depends on transparency, the Board said, but "the sharing of research data is vastly different from unreasonable, excessive Freedom of Information Act requests for personal information and voluminous data that are then used to harass and intimidate scientists."
Let me repeat that last phrase. It captures my feelings precisely:

The sharing of research data is vastly different from unreasonable, excessive Freedom of Information Act requests for personal information and voluminous data that are then used to harass and intimidate scientists.


The serial comma lives

| No Comments | 1 TrackBack
Share |
Although some people call it the Oxford comma, because it was apparently introduced in Hart's Rules, first published in 1904. What's the Oxford comma you ask?

This sentence uses it.

For teaching me that the Oxford comma resolves ambiguity, I'd like to thank my parents, Sinead O'Connor, and the Pope.
This sentence doesn't.

For teaching me that the Oxford comma resolves ambiguity, I'd like to thank my parents, Sinead O'Connor and the Pope.
See the difference? I didn't learn it from Hart's. I learned it from Strunk & White and had it reinforced by Fowler.

Why do I bring this up? Because there was a report on Twitter that Oxford had ditched its comma. As far as I can tell the Twitter explosion stemmed from a tweet by @ktheory that used deleted the Oxford comma and referred to a post on kottke.org. The Twitter explosion was enough to prompt an official response from Oxford making it clear that they will continue "to retain or impose this last comma consistently".

I am very pleased.

Update (5 July): I should have mentioned that the second sentence above is the tweet from @ktheory that appears to have started the Twitter explosion.


Integrating R and C++

| No Comments | No TrackBacks
Share |
As I've mentioned before, I use R a lot for statistical analyses. I also do some programming in C++ when I develop software (like Hickory) that I think other people might like to use. I just learned about an approach to integrating C++ and R that I expect to use fairly extensively. It's the Rcpp package: It provides a C++ library that facilitates the integration of R and C++.

C++ code can be assigned to an object in R and called as a function, receiving arguments from  R and returning them. I'm not sure what magic happens under the hood, but it sounds very promising and powerful.

There's an example of its use over at Life in Code. Pretty cool, if you're a code geek like me.

 Subscribe in a reader

Pages

OpenID accepted here Learn more about OpenID

Technorati

Technorati search

» Blogs that link here

Nature Blog Network
Creative Commons License
This blog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

About this Archive

This page is an archive of entries from July 2011 listed from newest to oldest.

June 2011 is the previous archive.

August 2011 is the next archive.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.