Brendan Alexander

245 posts

Brendan Alexander banner
Brendan Alexander

Brendan Alexander

@_bcalexan

AAFC Biologist and applied statistician. Interested in ecological weed control and yield stability.

Katılım Aralık 2013
104 Takip Edilen38 Takipçiler
Brendan Alexander retweetledi
Frank Harrell
Frank Harrell@f2harrell·
Computing tool of the day: I've needed to have an elegant way to stitch together pieces of Quarto books to make a unified html file for teaching. In collaboration with Claude I now have a great yaml-driven tool for this. #rstats
Frank Harrell tweet media
English
1
2
35
2.6K
Brendan Alexander retweetledi
alex peysakhovich
alex peysakhovich@alex_peys·
got a framed copy to hang by the ai team
alex peysakhovich tweet media
English
77
4.2K
48.4K
553.2K
Breanne Tidemann
Breanne Tidemann@breannetidemann·
Life sure leads you down unexpected roads. I've had an opportunity come up recently that was too good to walk away from. And so this summer I will be leaving my current position and my family and I will be moving to Norway. It's bittersweet leaving a career that I've built for 1/
Breanne Tidemann tweet media
English
20
3
97
4.6K
Breanne Tidemann
Breanne Tidemann@breannetidemann·
15 years, but right now it's the right opportunity for us and I'm excited for the adventures ahead. I'm so grateful for all the learning from fellow scientists, techs, farmers, agronomists, commission staff and everyone else in this crazy ag industry. But right now? 2/
Breanne Tidemann tweet media
English
2
0
20
740
Sheila Macrine, Ph.D.
Sheila Macrine, Ph.D.@MacrinePhD·
Physics anyone? The gap between the "weird" quantum world and our everyday reality just got a lot smaller. Researchers at @MIT have built a mathematical bridge showing that quantum behavior—like particles being in two places at once—can be calculated using the classical "principle of least action." By applying the same math we use to predict a falling ball to the double-slit experiment and quantum tunneling, they’ve found a common language for physics at all scales. news.mit.edu/2026/new-study… #Physics #QuantumMechanics #ScienceNews #MIT #Feynman #QuantumPhysics #Innovation #STEM #ScienceTwitter
English
47
97
414
24.3K
Elmir Omerovic
Elmir Omerovic@elmir1omerovic·
@f2harrell How would you respond to the criticism by Evans et al. in 10.1001/jama.2026.4175? Are the arguments made there against Bayesian methods in phase 3 RCTs valid in any meaningful methodological sense? In particular, what do you make of this claim: “Use of Bayesian methods in late-phase or confirmatory clinical trials has generally been limited to supplementary analyses, given recognition that their implementation can compromise evidentiary and integrity standards and the reliability of results through (1) concession of the benefits of randomization through their inclusion of external (prior) information; (2) loss of objectivity by incorporating sponsor- or investigator-specific priors; and (3) reduced robustness via reliance on strong and sometimes unverifiable assumptions.”
Frank Harrell@f2harrell

Celebrating the draft FDA Bayesian guidance document with our perspective in @JAMA_current. Honored to co-author with Jack Lee (MD Anderson), Lisa LaVange (past director of Office of Biostatistics FDA CDER and president of ASA @AmstatNews ),& my Bayesian inspiration @d_spiegel

English
4
3
7
3.7K
Brendan Alexander
Brendan Alexander@_bcalexan·
2/2 in the same way, betting on good poker hands isn’t an error even if you lose the hand.
English
0
0
0
12
Brendan Alexander
Brendan Alexander@_bcalexan·
@f2harrell I’ve been trying to understand your view on type 1 errors. Is your view that acting as though a treatment has an effect is not an error if the data suggests it because it’s simply the most logical move? 1/2
English
2
0
0
42
John Cleese
John Cleese@JohnCleese·
Join me this fall for a screening of “Monty Python and the Holy Grail” followed by a live Q&A session. Prepare your silliest questions for me and get your tickets now on johncleeselive.com OR I SHALL TAUNT YOU FOR A SECOND TIME! ☠️🏰🩸🐇🪾 #montypython #holygrail
John Cleese tweet media
English
85
190
1.3K
37.1K
Adam Frank
Adam Frank@AdamFrank4·
1) @CColose @AstroKatie @WKCosmo Yes. This idea that consensus isn't science is so profoundly stupid. It is for scientists! it's how we, as a community, decide what's understood and what is not. And science is always about communities of scientists.
English
87
2
32
23.7K
Brendan Alexander
Brendan Alexander@_bcalexan·
@5_utr Would you elaborate on this? I don’t think I’ve seen this topic explained in such a way before.
English
0
0
0
8
NonsparseOncologist
NonsparseOncologist@5_utr·
4/ Bayesians have a finite "belief budget": ∫ p(θ)dθ = 1. This is critical. This forces trade-offs—confidence in one idea costs confidence elsewhere. It's basically a built-in guard against overconfidence
English
2
0
0
148
NonsparseOncologist
NonsparseOncologist@5_utr·
After recent discussion around RTOG 1112, where the authors misinterpreted their own main results and conclusion due to multiplicity concerns, and called a “positive” trial “negative”, I think it’s worthwhile for a thread on multiplicity and controlling α… 🧵
English
1
2
2
544
Brendan Alexander
Brendan Alexander@_bcalexan·
@matloff @f2harrell @US_FDA I’m very interested in this answer as well. I still don’t see how multiple comparisons are adjusted for in cases where the treatments are assumed to be non-exchangeable. Sceptical priors only?
English
2
0
0
86
Frank Harrell
Frank Harrell@f2harrell·
@_bcalexan @matloff @US_FDA This is a key unanswered question. I can see allowing a decision maker to use her own prior if she was forced to set it in writing before seeing the results. But there is also an argument for full pre-specification before the study.
English
2
0
0
121
Brendan Alexander
Brendan Alexander@_bcalexan·
@matloff @f2harrell @US_FDA That answers who has to make the decision but not how they will do it. If you are comfortable with a final arbiter to make the decision then would it also be allowable for that arbiter to set their own prior for the analysis? Or they could ask for p-values of course.
English
2
0
1
120
Norm Matloff 你有冇諗清楚呀?
That's a standard response I've received over the years I've been criticizing p-values, "But you have to make a decision!" As I've said more than once in this thread, I certainly am pro-decision making. But I want the decision to be made by the relevant people, NOT to be usurped by p-values or priors. The FDA must ultimately must approve a drug or not, and they should do so with full information. If a statistician uses priors, they are impinging on the FDA's right/responsibility to make a fully informed decision. As to lack of objectivity, we can never have perfection in that regard, but we certainly should not make it worse, which the Bayesian approach does.
English
1
1
1
178