Close

Complete Captcha

• 2 years - 297 posts - Latest - RSS
• Thread: 490 Goods vs 361 No Goods

1. Economist
   bbad
   

   More seriously: FG from Brown is the real star. MC’s students and some of the Yale students could do very well, too. Perhaps some others as well.

   "To showcase the estimation procedure, we obtain bounds on distributional causal
   effects of expenditures on leisure and food, using the 1996 UK Family Expenditure Survey. We find that food is a necessity while leisure is a luxury good"
   I would have thought it was the opposite.

   This is the best that this year has to offer? Shouldn't a new technique tell us something new about the world? This seems pretty lame. There is a reason why this field is dying.

   2 years ago # QUOTE 5 Jab 1 No Jab !

2. Economist
   7486
   

   FG is a mathematician who proves technical stuff. He doesn’t give a fierk to empirical usefulness. A lot of econometricians share the same spirit.

   More seriously: FG from Brown is the real star. MC’s students and some of the Yale students could do very well, too. Perhaps some others as well.

   "To showcase the estimation procedure, we obtain bounds on distributional causal
   effects of expenditures on leisure and food, using the 1996 UK Family Expenditure Survey. We find that food is a necessity while leisure is a luxury good"
   I would have thought it was the opposite.

   This is the best that this year has to offer? Shouldn't a new technique tell us something new about the world? This seems pretty lame. There is a reason why this field is dying.

   2 years ago # QUOTE 5 Jab 1 No Jab !

3. Economist
   d3c7
   

   KY from TAMU is the next Susan

   Trying to summarize, weighting more serious predictions more:
   1. FG (Brown)
   2/3. XM/KN (Michigan)
   4. ?? (Yale)
   5. ?? (UCL)
   6. LL (Penn State)
   7. AC (BU)
   8. ?? (TAMU)
   And possibly multiple from Yale, UCL (unclear). And how many U.S. econometrics job openings are there this year--even 8??

   2 years ago # QUOTE 2 Jab 2 No Jab !

4. Economist
   2ced
   

   failed mathematician

   FG is a mathematician who proves technical stuff. He doesn’t give a fierk to empirical usefulness. A lot of econometricians share the same spirit.

   More seriously: FG from Brown is the real star. MC’s students and some of the Yale students could do very well, too. Perhaps some others as well.

   "To showcase the estimation procedure, we obtain bounds on distributional causal
   effects of expenditures on leisure and food, using the 1996 UK Family Expenditure Survey. We find that food is a necessity while leisure is a luxury good"
   I would have thought it was the opposite.

   This is the best that this year has to offer? Shouldn't a new technique tell us something new about the world? This seems pretty lame. There is a reason why this field is dying.
   

   2 years ago # QUOTE 4 Jab 1 No Jab !

5. Economist
   8d88
   

   How is it that no one has mentioned VS from MIT?
   Clearly one of the best in the MIT cohort overall.

   2 years ago # QUOTE 1 Jab 1 No Jab !

6. Economist
   8955
   

   In what sense? Enlighten it.

   How is it that no one has mentioned VS from MIT?
   Clearly one of the best in the MIT cohort overall.

   2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !

7. Economist
   36e8
   

   More seriously: FG from Brown is the real star. MC’s students and some of the Yale students could do very well, too. Perhaps some others as well.

   "To showcase the estimation procedure, we obtain bounds on distributional causal
   effects of expenditures on leisure and food, using the 1996 UK Family Expenditure Survey. We find that food is a necessity while leisure is a luxury good"
   I would have thought it was the opposite.

   This is the best that this year has to offer? Shouldn't a new technique tell us something new about the world? This seems pretty lame. There is a reason why this field is dying.

   Actually, it's this obsession with man-bites-dog kind of findings that gave rise to cuteconomics. If your method (or theory) gives unintuitive results, it's most likely crap.

   2 years ago # QUOTE 2 Jab 2 No Jab !

8. Economist
   8ae9
   

   lol, not even close to HKU undergraduate level!

   2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !

9. Economist
   1231
   

   KY from TAMU is the next Susan

   Trying to summarize, weighting more serious predictions more:
   1. FG (Brown)
   2/3. XM/KN (Michigan)
   4. ?? (Yale)
   5. ?? (UCL)
   6. LL (Penn State)
   7. AC (BU)
   8. ?? (TAMU)
   And possibly multiple from Yale, UCL (unclear). And how many U.S. econometrics job openings are there this year--even 8??

   Which Susan?

   2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !

10. Economist
    39ce
    

    Susan Athey

    KY from TAMU is the next Susan

    Trying to summarize, weighting more serious predictions more:
    1. FG (Brown)
    2/3. XM/KN (Michigan)
    4. ?? (Yale)
    5. ?? (UCL)
    6. LL (Penn State)
    7. AC (BU)
    8. ?? (TAMU)
    And possibly multiple from Yale, UCL (unclear). And how many U.S. econometrics job openings are there this year--even 8??

    Which Susan?

    2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !

11. Economist
    897b
    

    Well first and foremost she doesn't do the unethical practice of listing "work in progress" without actually having a draft and for me that gains a lot of respect. This is followed by the mathematics community (as seen in section 1 bullet 3 of http://www.ams.org/about-us/governance/policy-statements/sec-ethics).

    Setting that aside she has five working papers in econometrics/machine learning, I am not an expert in the field to judge their quality, but such a productivity is excellent among MIT/Harvard students and particularly in a difficult field.

    It is clear she has a no-nonsense approach and I am excited to see how she does.

    In what sense? Enlighten it.

    How is it that no one has mentioned VS from MIT?
    Clearly one of the best in the MIT cohort overall.
    

    2 years ago # QUOTE 1 Jab 2 No Jab !

12. Economist
    8955
    

    So you know nothing about her quality but think she’s great because she has a decent number of papers and from MIT. A lot of other people have 5 papers, some of which are even published.

    Well first and foremost she doesn't do the unethical practice of listing "work in progress" without actually having a draft and for me that gains a lot of respect. This is followed by the mathematics community (as seen in section 1 bullet 3 of http://www.ams.org/about-us/governance/policy-statements/sec-ethics).
    Setting that aside she has five working papers in econometrics/machine learning, I am not an expert in the field to judge their quality, but such a productivity is excellent among MIT/Harvard students and particularly in a difficult field.
    It is clear she has a no-nonsense approach and I am excited to see how she does.

    In what sense? Enlighten it.

    How is it that no one has mentioned VS from MIT?
    Clearly one of the best in the MIT cohort overall.
    

    2 years ago # QUOTE 5 Jab 2 No Jab !

13. Economist
    9ac9
    

    Honestly this isn't even a bad strategy. Having numerous decent-length papers from one-if-not-the-best econometrics school is something very few people do. Of course having 1 great paper can be much better than this, but even with this partial information we can already infer in what ballpark of talent she is, which would clearly put her in the best 8 econometricans of the market atm.

    So you know nothing about her quality but think she’s great because she has a decent number of papers and from MIT. A lot of other people have 5 papers, some of which are even published.

    Well first and foremost she doesn't do the unethical practice of listing "work in progress" without actually having a draft and for me that gains a lot of respect. This is followed by the mathematics community (as seen in section 1 bullet 3 of http://www.ams.org/about-us/governance/policy-statements/sec-ethics).
    Setting that aside she has five working papers in econometrics/machine learning, I am not an expert in the field to judge their quality, but such a productivity is excellent among MIT/Harvard students and particularly in a difficult field.
    It is clear she has a no-nonsense approach and I am excited to see how she does.

    In what sense? Enlighten it.

    How is it that no one has mentioned VS from MIT?
    Clearly one of the best in the MIT cohort overall.

    2 years ago # QUOTE 2 Jab 0 No Jab !

14. Economist
    2c77
    

    Will this work be taken seriously in a math department?

    failed mathematician

    2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !

15. Economist
    3c84
    

    Econometrician in Stat/Math department: K1 math?
    Econometrician in Econ/Fin department: I can't understand a word. Please write in English.

    2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !

16. Economist
    bbad
    

    Well first and foremost she doesn't do the unethical practice of listing "work in progress" without actually having a draft and for me that gains a lot of respect. This is followed by the mathematics community (as seen in section 1 bullet 3 of http://www.ams.org/about-us/governance/policy-statements/sec-ethics).
    Setting that aside she has five working papers in econometrics/machine learning, I am not an expert in the field to judge their quality, but such a productivity is excellent among MIT/Harvard students and particularly in a difficult field.
    It is clear she has a no-nonsense approach and I am excited to see how she does.

    In what sense? Enlighten it.

    How is it that no one has mentioned VS from MIT?
    Clearly one of the best in the MIT cohort overall.
    

    Was she on the market last year? Why is she a postdoc?

    2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !

17. Economist
    3433
    

    Come on! Almost all papers coauthored with Victor or Whitney, on THEIR research agenda....

    Well first and foremost she doesn't do the unethical practice of listing "work in progress" without actually having a draft and for me that gains a lot of respect. This is followed by the mathematics community (as seen in section 1 bullet 3 of http://www.ams.org/about-us/governance/policy-statements/sec-ethics).
    Setting that aside she has five working papers in econometrics/machine learning, I am not an expert in the field to judge their quality, but such a productivity is excellent among MIT/Harvard students and particularly in a difficult field.
    It is clear she has a no-nonsense approach and I am excited to see how she does.

    In what sense? Enlighten it.

    How is it that no one has mentioned VS from MIT?
    Clearly one of the best in the MIT cohort overall.
    

    2 years ago # QUOTE 2 Jab 0 No Jab !

18. Economist
    3433
    

    Plus... selling this idea of “cross fitting” and “locally robust estimators” as new is clearly outrageous! The first is an old trick in stats and the later has been done a long time ago in econometrics itself...

    2 years ago # QUOTE 3 Jab 0 No Jab !

19. Economist
    800b
    

    So working with your advisor on a top 5 publication makes you an RA... The amount of stupidity one has to read in this place...

    Candidates from Michigan also have r&r at Econometrica and Restud. But those are all coauthored with Cattaneo and Jansson. I am pretty sure they are glorified RAs.

    2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 10 No Jab !

20. Economist
    db53
    

    So working with your advisor on a top 5 publication makes you an RA... The amount of stupidity one has to read in this place...

    Candidates from Michigan also have r&r at Econometrica and Restud. But those are all coauthored with Cattaneo and Jansson. I am pretty sure they are glorified RAs.

    Please. It's not "coauthored with your advisor". It's coauthored with Cattaneo and Jansson who are each very very active researcher nowadays. Further, the Res.Stud. paper is not even forthcoming, it's already published! Which means it had been submitted when the guy was still reading Davidson&McKinnon!! How do you call this if not RA? Why the need to coauthor your JMP with another student from stats? Same story for the Yale guy.

    2 years ago # QUOTE 6 Jab 2 No Jab !

Reply »