Boris Sobolev
@sobor.bsky.social
Causal questions, counterfactual answers
Ce que l'on conçoit bien s'énonce clairement
ну не дано тебе, ну нету дара… пора переквалифицироваться в управдома…
ну не дано тебе, ну нету дара… пора переквалифицироваться в управдома…
March 8, 2025 at 8:36 PM
Ce que l'on conçoit bien s'énonce clairement
ну не дано тебе, ну нету дара… пора переквалифицироваться в управдома…
ну не дано тебе, ну нету дара… пора переквалифицироваться в управдома…
‘the vision based on evidence’?! 🤡
keep digging; 🍿
keep digging; 🍿
March 8, 2025 at 8:16 PM
‘the vision based on evidence’?! 🤡
keep digging; 🍿
keep digging; 🍿
Every joke has some fun in it. ☺️
January 26, 2025 at 8:27 PM
Every joke has some fun in it. ☺️
For the same reason trialists are so excited about not knowing treatment mechanisms: they want to get away with ATE whereas patients expect clinical decision-making based on ITE.
January 26, 2025 at 1:57 AM
For the same reason trialists are so excited about not knowing treatment mechanisms: they want to get away with ATE whereas patients expect clinical decision-making based on ITE.
Вечер перестал быть томным.
January 25, 2025 at 11:03 PM
Вечер перестал быть томным.
hold on, hold on, we’ll get to foolishness in a moment.
In Fisher 1926, you read ‘averages’.
A question for an undergrad completed an elementary course in statistics — To which group of statistical objects do averages belong: estimators or estimates?
In Fisher 1926, you read ‘averages’.
A question for an undergrad completed an elementary course in statistics — To which group of statistical objects do averages belong: estimators or estimates?
January 25, 2025 at 6:20 PM
hold on, hold on, we’ll get to foolishness in a moment.
In Fisher 1926, you read ‘averages’.
A question for an undergrad completed an elementary course in statistics — To which group of statistical objects do averages belong: estimators or estimates?
In Fisher 1926, you read ‘averages’.
A question for an undergrad completed an elementary course in statistics — To which group of statistical objects do averages belong: estimators or estimates?
Great! I’m glad you agreed it’s ‘concluded’…
That’s right, it is not just an estimator.
That’s right, it is not just an estimator.
January 25, 2025 at 7:40 AM
Great! I’m glad you agreed it’s ‘concluded’…
That’s right, it is not just an estimator.
That’s right, it is not just an estimator.
Indeed, this should be engraved at the entry to every EBM office: 'Randomization ensures a valid error estimate. This may be applied to test the significance of observed difference btw averages of the treatment groups.'
Not a word about causality, as it is concluded by reasoning, not statistics.
January 25, 2025 at 2:59 AM
Indeed, this should be engraved at the entry to every EBM office: 'Randomization ensures a valid error estimate. This may be applied to test the significance of observed difference btw averages of the treatment groups.'
Not a word about causality, as it is concluded by reasoning, not statistics.
Oh, by all means, please test the significance of the observed difference between the averages of plots treated differently. 😂
Average here, average there.
Average here, average there.
January 24, 2025 at 10:28 PM
Oh, by all means, please test the significance of the observed difference between the averages of plots treated differently. 😂
Average here, average there.
Average here, average there.
Probability of benefit, PNS, is the future that personalized medicine is going to discover…
January 24, 2025 at 10:18 PM
Probability of benefit, PNS, is the future that personalized medicine is going to discover…
According to Fisher, it’s about ‘testing observed differences between average outcomes of groups treated differently’
January 24, 2025 at 10:10 PM
According to Fisher, it’s about ‘testing observed differences between average outcomes of groups treated differently’
Fisher said many things, including about eugenics and tobacco smoking.
But he didn’t say that thing you attributed to him.
But he didn’t say that thing you attributed to him.
January 24, 2025 at 10:04 PM
Fisher said many things, including about eugenics and tobacco smoking.
But he didn’t say that thing you attributed to him.
But he didn’t say that thing you attributed to him.
I am not.
I am an arrow.
I am a straight line going beyond the EBM horizon.
I am an arrow.
I am a straight line going beyond the EBM horizon.
January 24, 2025 at 10:02 PM
I am not.
I am an arrow.
I am a straight line going beyond the EBM horizon.
I am an arrow.
I am a straight line going beyond the EBM horizon.
On the right, I see an estimator, which you reason is unbiased due to design. Fine. What is the estimand? What is it estimator of?
January 24, 2025 at 9:57 PM
On the right, I see an estimator, which you reason is unbiased due to design. Fine. What is the estimand? What is it estimator of?
again, what makes it causal? all the probabilities here are conditional 🤷♂️
January 24, 2025 at 6:23 PM
again, what makes it causal? all the probabilities here are conditional 🤷♂️
If one can’t explicitly demonstrate the target quantity of measurement, how do they know they measure it?
That tells all about the scientific pretensions of EBM preaching
That tells all about the scientific pretensions of EBM preaching
January 24, 2025 at 6:15 PM
If one can’t explicitly demonstrate the target quantity of measurement, how do they know they measure it?
That tells all about the scientific pretensions of EBM preaching
That tells all about the scientific pretensions of EBM preaching
Like we say in Russia: на воре шапка горит… 🫣
agreed, the preaching of EBM High Priests is totally useless in determining causal estimands
agreed, the preaching of EBM High Priests is totally useless in determining causal estimands
January 24, 2025 at 5:10 PM
Like we say in Russia: на воре шапка горит… 🫣
agreed, the preaching of EBM High Priests is totally useless in determining causal estimands
agreed, the preaching of EBM High Priests is totally useless in determining causal estimands
A sleight of hand, again? ay-ya-yay…
Do they, in experimental design, teach you machinations?
Just put it down, in math notation or layman words, the causal estimand of an RCT… not reasoning, not statistical phraseology, not EBM blurred vision, not Rubin’s charade; just an estimand… then we talk
Do they, in experimental design, teach you machinations?
Just put it down, in math notation or layman words, the causal estimand of an RCT… not reasoning, not statistical phraseology, not EBM blurred vision, not Rubin’s charade; just an estimand… then we talk
January 24, 2025 at 4:33 PM
A sleight of hand, again? ay-ya-yay…
Do they, in experimental design, teach you machinations?
Just put it down, in math notation or layman words, the causal estimand of an RCT… not reasoning, not statistical phraseology, not EBM blurred vision, not Rubin’s charade; just an estimand… then we talk
Do they, in experimental design, teach you machinations?
Just put it down, in math notation or layman words, the causal estimand of an RCT… not reasoning, not statistical phraseology, not EBM blurred vision, not Rubin’s charade; just an estimand… then we talk
Are those the same books that make you struggle with writing down a causal estimand?
It reminds me an old joke about Communism: ‘We promised you the bright future; no one was promising food and shelter’
It reminds me an old joke about Communism: ‘We promised you the bright future; no one was promising food and shelter’
January 24, 2025 at 3:45 PM
Are those the same books that make you struggle with writing down a causal estimand?
It reminds me an old joke about Communism: ‘We promised you the bright future; no one was promising food and shelter’
It reminds me an old joke about Communism: ‘We promised you the bright future; no one was promising food and shelter’
I can recommend a great optometrist.
January 24, 2025 at 3:25 PM
I can recommend a great optometrist.
It’s a free country, you can fancy any name. But that’s just a name in your head.
Cause-and-effect relationships is a feature of this world. Causal inference is how we convince ourselves and others that changing X will change Y.
Cause-and-effect relationships is a feature of this world. Causal inference is how we convince ourselves and others that changing X will change Y.
January 23, 2025 at 6:27 PM
It’s a free country, you can fancy any name. But that’s just a name in your head.
Cause-and-effect relationships is a feature of this world. Causal inference is how we convince ourselves and others that changing X will change Y.
Cause-and-effect relationships is a feature of this world. Causal inference is how we convince ourselves and others that changing X will change Y.
I thought we already agreed that ‘sleight of hand’ is not admissible in our debate 🫢
My example of a random function gives you several values for the same element from the probability space and shows that your animus toward ‘counterfactuals in causality’ is simply misguided…
My example of a random function gives you several values for the same element from the probability space and shows that your animus toward ‘counterfactuals in causality’ is simply misguided…
January 23, 2025 at 3:18 PM
I thought we already agreed that ‘sleight of hand’ is not admissible in our debate 🫢
My example of a random function gives you several values for the same element from the probability space and shows that your animus toward ‘counterfactuals in causality’ is simply misguided…
My example of a random function gives you several values for the same element from the probability space and shows that your animus toward ‘counterfactuals in causality’ is simply misguided…
‘very’ bad? is the adverb really necessary?
are you saying you can’t define a family of random variables on the same probability space indexed by t from the value set T?
Perhaps some elementary textbook of probability can be useful…
hé hé
are you saying you can’t define a family of random variables on the same probability space indexed by t from the value set T?
Perhaps some elementary textbook of probability can be useful…
hé hé
January 23, 2025 at 2:59 PM
‘very’ bad? is the adverb really necessary?
are you saying you can’t define a family of random variables on the same probability space indexed by t from the value set T?
Perhaps some elementary textbook of probability can be useful…
hé hé
are you saying you can’t define a family of random variables on the same probability space indexed by t from the value set T?
Perhaps some elementary textbook of probability can be useful…
hé hé