Comment by ur-whale | Hacker News Reader

Comment by ur-whale | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

>> why can't data science simply be about applying the scientific method in the realm of data analysis? >That's what a statistician do.

Mmmh.

Run that experiment for me next time you meet a statistician:

    - ask him if he can apply Chi-squared to a decision problem

    - ask him if he can *explain* how and why Chi-squared works.

In my experience, all statisticians can do the first, almost none can do the second.

Learning how to use a screwdriver to screw screws without understanding notions of torque and moment doesn't mean you're applying the scientific method.

I would argue that they should be able to understand it to the level that they can at least defend Chi-squared as a tool for the problem at hand. Then, they should be able to evaluate whether or not it works correctly.

If a medical researcher is testing a new radio-therapy treatment, but can't mathematically model every fission problem you can throw at them, they're still applying the scientific method.

> In my experience, all statisticians can do the first, almost none can do the second.

I think a phd statistician can do this.

Master statistic does not touch upon field and measure theory in statistical inference so many questions get unanswered. But I suspect you may be correct.

I view chisq as a statistical distance for most of my encounter and learning.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com