Відео

I think we need to talk Christian. If there’s away where I can talk to you privately, I would love to talk to you.

wish u included some refs that u used in this vid

use statistics for predicting the winner

A topic thats fascinated me for a long time is the statistics of persuasion. How strong does the evidence need to be to persuade people one way or another? Of course, rhetoric is the main way we persuade other people, but it's a nice thought experiment and a very bayesian challenge

Statistics is the workhorse for the sciences.

Thinking Judeah Pearl or Donald Rubin?

Remember, data is only random from a frequentist perspective. Data is fixed according to Bayesian statistics!

Hey, this is an amazing video! Cheers to these great statisticians. Rao taught one of lecturers in undergrad. He could never stop speaking so highly of him!

Loved the content! Beautifully explained !!

BRO, thank you for this channel and your work! Truly truly insightful!

C.R rao prolly my fav statistician

it is sad that fields medal gives only 15k

Isnt it disturbing that the fields medal only gives the winner 15000$? I mean math is the base of our infrastructure

Isnt it disturbing that the fields medal only gives the winner 15000$? I mean math is the base of our infrastructure

Just a quick note, on 4:27 you said that all random variables have a pdf, but that is not always true. The easiest example is a cdf which is not differentiable, then the pdf can not exist. Much more complicated examples can be constructed, but the previous is a quick one.

Isnt Economics a fake one from a totally different investment lobby? They just brought enough marketing rights and missleading interpretations on copy right laws close enough to be called "Nobel prize" as well afaik

I agree with your prediction about Vladimir Vapnik. He would be a worthy recipient. It would also recognise the long term efforts of the Russian probability school.

You really should research your stories. Nobel intentionally omitted mathematics because a mathematics scoundrel stole his wife.

5 categories, economics is named after the two novel prize

What’s the background music

You get hierarchical modeling and the variance of estimates (almost) for free with Bayesian analysis. Take the Bayes pill and make a video about it.

what is the difference between biostatistics and biostatics?

There should be absolutely no award for economics whatsoever, what a fudged up "field"

Well thank god no one told them CS exists or else we'd have an arbitrary prize for the easiest form of applied math.

Can we get a video on the Jackknife method or on MCMC?

Professor Vapnik absolutely deserves this prize 😁I had him in mind from the beginning of the video!

Great video. But, there is no drama. Well… let me correct that. There is, but only among those who don’t actually use statistics. People who actually use statistics know that the different interpretations apply to different circumstances.

Judea Pearl for the 2025 prize?

That was super interesting, thank you!

The Economics prize was added later. It is not an official one, which is why it says in honor of Alfred Noble. Which is why Math maybe added.

Isn't Cox's work kind of an extension of GLMs with a particularly useful GLM?

The bootstrap and Crémer-Rao lower Bound are most important invention in stats in last century - they deserve the recognitions without doubt. My predition: Nobel Prixe of stats for 2025 is James-Stein Estimator resp. their proofs - that was huge surprise for many statisticians and showed that MLE is not the sufficient estimator and contradict to Crémer-Rao lower bound.

Thank you for the videos. The story I heard as a student was Nobel's wife was having an affair with a Mathematician, which is why there is no Nobel Math Prize.

i think Ross Ihaka and Robert Gentleman, the designers of R, deserve this prize as well as many students and statisticians use R.

great video! I didn't know about the price & i'm doing a master in stats haha

Well, I knew Florence Nightingale, but I was pretty sure she was not the one to win this 😄

Man do I wish you made these videos when I was doing my bachelors in statistics, would've removed a lot of confusion. Still though I really enjoy watching your channel and I hope your goal of making statistics fun for everyone succeeds!

To paraphrase Chappelle Roan, C. R. Rao is your favorite statistician's favorite statistician

Very nicely presented, I learned a lot and really enjoyed the reasonable pace at which you walked the viewer through the contributions as well as their significance.

Thank you Christian. Love all your videos. Thank you for making them, I'm learning a lot

Bold of you to assume I know the name of any statistician.

Well, Nobel died in 1896 and the prize started in 1901, before Von Neumann and Turing were even born, so I'm pretty confident nobody told Nobel that Computer Science existed lol

Exponential distribution entered the room

I'll definitely be interested to see who this year's prize goes to. In my opinion Andrew Gelman is definitely in the running. But given how new this prize is, there are others who ought to be considered first.

0:53 Yup, that’s me. You may wonder how I ended up in this situation…

There is no Nobel Prize in Economics. Look into it to be surprised

I really intend no offense, Very Normal, but you give off the distinct impression of someone who has studied very little about the basics of frequentist and Bayesian statistics, as you make a number of false or inaccurate statements (particularly about frequentism). Let me list just a few: - Priors: frequentist analyses absolutely can (and do) incorporate prior knowledge and possible values of a parameter of interest. These are just not called "priors"; they are called "auxiliary data sets" and are free from subjective choices of which variables to use (which Bayesian analyses suffer from). - Frequentist analyses also produce a range of likely values of a parameter of interest. See "confidence intervals" - The phrase "Bayesian statistics" DOES NOT come from Bayes theorem. Bayes theorem is a general statement that is valid for any system of probability that satisfies the Kolmogorov axioms. "Bayesian statistics" derives its name from Bayes who pioneered the interpretation of probability to mean degree of belief. - The "D" in "PDF" stands for "density", not "distribution" Frequentist and Bayesian analyses really do much of the same things; the difference, fundamentally, is in the interpretation of the word "probability" and whether or not a result should depend on subjective choices just as much as data, or on data alone.

The sound bite at 8:16 is what made me subscribe 😂

Oh, Very Normal channel, you're surelly in the upper quartile of a channels quality distribution

i wish I were able to understand everything and to apply this kind of thing.. :S. I know statistics in a more broad way. I feel dumb