2024 π Daylatest newsbuy art
Twenty — minutes — maybe — more.Naomichoose four wordsmore quotes
very clickable
statistics + data
The Nature Methods Points of View column column offers practical advice in design and data presentation for the busy scientist.
With the publication of Uncertainty and the Management of Epidemics, we celebrate our 50th column! Since 2013, our Nature Methods Points of Significance has been offering crisp explanations and practical suggestions about best practices in statistical analysis and reporting. To all our readers and coauthors: thank you and see you in the next column!

Nature Methods: Points of Significance

Martin Krzywinski @MKrzywinski mkweb.bcgsc.ca
Points of Significance column in Nature Methods. (Launch of Points of Significance)

Generated on 23-Jul-2024 (3 days ago).

Metrics are provided by Altmetric.

Access values larger than 10,000 are rounded off to nearest 1,000 by Altmetric.

article accesses daily %nm %all cit (ws) cit (cross) altmetric
Significance, P values and t-tests 224,000 57 91 98 106 93 94
Error bars 210,000 53 98 99 176 179 187
Visualizing samples with box plots 201,000 53 86 98 376 371 82
Principal component analysis 196,000 76 87 96 491 798 87
Association, correlation and causation 176,000 55 98 99 194 179 185
P values and the search for significance 133,000 48 94 98 62 69 156
Replication 131,000 36 57 93 118 94 25
Statistics versus machine learning 126,000 55 97 99 219 829 355
Importance of being uncertain 118,000 30 80 96 58 55 52
Power and sample size 108,000 28 79 97 128 127 56
Nonparametric tests 65,000 17 55 88 55 54 13
Comparing samples—part I 63,000 17 68 92 26 33 21
Analysis of variance and blocking 61,000 17 62 92 47 49 19
Nested designs 59,000 16 86 97 43 38 56
Bayes' theorem 58,000 17 74 95 60 53 39
Two-factor designs 57,000 16 34 51 26 27 3
Comparing samples—part II 54,000 14 47 87 54 48 12
Sources of variation 53,000 15 57 92 18 18 17
Simple linear regression 52,000 16 75 93 74 83 29
Split plot design 52,000 15 40 78 50 46 7
The SEIRS model for infectious disease dynamics 51,000 34 98 99 102 110 357
Bayesian statistics 49,000 15 57 90 20 17 17
Designing comparative experiments 48,000 13 50 81 12 14 8
Sampling distributions and the bootstrap 47,000 14 54 91 73 77 18
Interpreting P values 46,000 17 74 95 47 52 60
Multiple linear regression 45,000 14 80 95 78 80 43
Classification and regression trees 41,000 16 46 80 169 196 10
Classification evaluation 39,000 13 70 95 205 210 45
Model selection and overfitting 37,000 13 66 92 370 350 27
Bayesian networks 36,000 11 45 77 33 26 7
Clustering 33,000 13 50 89 80 89 20
Optimal experimental design 26,000 12 49 89 49 56 21
Analyzing outliers: influential or nuisance? 26,000 9 35 68 55 56 5
Machine learning: supervised methods 22,000 9 56 91 156 186 22
Logistic regression 21,000 7 68 92 73 69 25
Regression diagnostics 21,000 7 46 72 47 48 6
The curse(s) of dimensionality 19,000 8 58 89 184 199 21
Ensemble methods: bagging and random forests 18,000 7 37 79 132 146 9
Modeling infectious epidemics 17,000 11 85 97 54 65 117
Machine learning: a primer 17,000 7 89 97 93 103 79
Tabular data 13,000 5 28 64 3 2 4
Regularization 12,000 4 54 87 31 27 14
Two-level factorial experiments 11,000 6 12 24 10 10 1
Predicting with confidence and tolerance 7,860 4 30 67 5 5 5
Markov models—Markov chains 7,503 4 40 90 16 17 23
Markov models — hidden Markov models 5,925 3 25 79 18 20 9
The standardization fallacy 4,945 4 47 93 27 27 32
Convolutional neural networks 4,918 14 17 72 5 8 6
Quantile regression 4,167 2 36 78 30 61 9
Markov models — training and evaluation of hidden Markov models 4,085 3 41 85 5 4 13
The class imbalance problem 3,850 4 20 75 35 39 7
Survival analysis—time-to-event data and censoring 3,533 5 17 68 6 6 4
Analyzing outliers: robust methods to the rescue 3,506 2 25 50 19 18 3
Uncertainty and the management of epidemics 3,489 2 21 70 6 9 7
Neural networks primer 3,023 5 19 69 2 2 4
Graphical assessment of tests and classifiers 2,174 2 28 83 7 5 11
Regression modeling of time-to-event data with censoring 1,899 3 11 71 3 3 5
Testing for rare conditions 1,505 1 15 60 2 2 4
Comparing classifier performance with baselines 1,474 12 27 77 0 0 7
Errors in predictor variables 1,184 6 3 30 1 1 1
2,957,040 992 53 83 4,644 5,658


%NM percentile rank (avg 53) for the article of tracked articles of a similar age in Nature Methods.

%ALL percentile rank (avg 83) for the article of tracked articles of a similar age in all journals.

Total accesses 2,957,040.

Total citations 5,785 = sum(maxi(webscience,crossref)).

news + thoughts

Nasa to send our human genome discs to the Moon

Sat 23-03-2024

We'd like to say a ‘cosmic hello’: mathematics, culture, palaeontology, art and science, and ... human genomes.

Martin Krzywinski @MKrzywinski mkweb.bcgsc.ca
SANCTUARY PROJECT | A cosmic hello of art, science, and genomes. (details)
Martin Krzywinski @MKrzywinski mkweb.bcgsc.ca
SANCTUARY PROJECT | Benoit Faiveley, founder of the Sanctuary project gives the Sanctuary disc a visual check at CEA LeQ Grenoble (image: Vincent Thomas). (details)
Martin Krzywinski @MKrzywinski mkweb.bcgsc.ca
SANCTUARY PROJECT | Sanctuary team examines the Life disc at INRIA Paris Saclay (image: Benedict Redgrove) (details)

Comparing classifier performance with baselines

Sat 23-03-2024

All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others. —George Orwell

This month, we will illustrate the importance of establishing a baseline performance level.

Baselines are typically generated independently for each dataset using very simple models. Their role is to set the minimum level of acceptable performance and help with comparing relative improvements in performance of other models.

Martin Krzywinski @MKrzywinski mkweb.bcgsc.ca
Nature Methods Points of Significance column: Comparing classifier performance with baselines. (read)

Unfortunately, baselines are often overlooked and, in the presence of a class imbalance5, must be established with care.

Megahed, F.M, Chen, Y-J., Jones-Farmer, A., Rigdon, S.E., Krzywinski, M. & Altman, N. (2024) Points of significance: Comparing classifier performance with baselines. Nat. Methods 20.

Happy 2024 π Day—
sunflowers ho!

Sat 09-03-2024

Celebrate π Day (March 14th) and dig into the digit garden. Let's grow something.

Martin Krzywinski @MKrzywinski mkweb.bcgsc.ca
2024 π DAY | A garden of 1,000 digits of π. (details)

How Analyzing Cosmic Nothing Might Explain Everything

Thu 18-01-2024

Huge empty areas of the universe called voids could help solve the greatest mysteries in the cosmos.

My graphic accompanying How Analyzing Cosmic Nothing Might Explain Everything in the January 2024 issue of Scientific American depicts the entire Universe in a two-page spread — full of nothing.

Martin Krzywinski @MKrzywinski mkweb.bcgsc.ca
How Analyzing Cosmic Nothing Might Explain Everything. Text by Michael Lemonick (editor), art direction by Jen Christiansen (Senior Graphics Editor), source: SDSS

The graphic uses the latest data from SDSS 12 and is an update to my Superclusters and Voids poster.

Michael Lemonick (editor) explains on the graphic:

“Regions of relatively empty space called cosmic voids are everywhere in the universe, and scientists believe studying their size, shape and spread across the cosmos could help them understand dark matter, dark energy and other big mysteries.

To use voids in this way, astronomers must map these regions in detail—a project that is just beginning.

Shown here are voids discovered by the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS), along with a selection of 16 previously named voids. Scientists expect voids to be evenly distributed throughout space—the lack of voids in some regions on the globe simply reflects SDSS’s sky coverage.”

voids

Sofia Contarini, Alice Pisani, Nico Hamaus, Federico Marulli Lauro Moscardini & Marco Baldi (2023) Cosmological Constraints from the BOSS DR12 Void Size Function Astrophysical Journal 953:46.

Nico Hamaus, Alice Pisani, Jin-Ah Choi, Guilhem Lavaux, Benjamin D. Wandelt & Jochen Weller (2020) Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2020:023.

Sloan Digital Sky Survey Data Release 12

constellation figures

Alan MacRobert (Sky & Telescope), Paulina Rowicka/Martin Krzywinski (revisions & Microscopium)

stars

Hoffleit & Warren Jr. (1991) The Bright Star Catalog, 5th Revised Edition (Preliminary Version).

cosmology

H0 = 67.4 km/(Mpc·s), Ωm = 0.315, Ωv = 0.685. Planck collaboration Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters (2018).

Martin Krzywinski | contact | Canada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences CentreBC Cancer Research CenterBC CancerPHSA
Google whack “vicissitudinal corporealization”
{ 10.9.234.152 }