<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The AstroStat Slog &#187; detection</title>
	<atom:link href="http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/tag/detection/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog</link>
	<description>Weaving together Astronomy+Statistics+Computer Science+Engineering+Intrumentation, far beyond the growing borders</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Sep 2011 17:05:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>survey and design of experiments</title>
		<link>http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2008/survey-and-design-of-experiments/</link>
		<comments>http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2008/survey-and-design-of-experiments/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Oct 2008 20:16:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>hlee</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Astro]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CHASC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cross-Cultural]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Data Processing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jargon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Methods]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Misc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[213]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AAS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Alanna Connors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[catalog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[census]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[detection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[experimental design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Long Beach]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[special session]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SPS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[survey]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/?p=894</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[People of experience would say very differently and wisely against what I&#8217;m going to discuss now. This post only combines two small cross sections of each branch of two trees, astronomy and statistics. 
When it comes to survey, the first thing comes in my mind is the census packet although I only saw it once [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>People of experience would say very differently and wisely against what I&#8217;m going to discuss now. This post only combines two small cross sections of each branch of two trees, astronomy and statistics. <span id="more-894"></span></p>
<p>When it comes to <b>survey,</b> the first thing comes in my mind is the census packet although I only saw it once (an easy way to disguise my age but this is true) but the questionaire layouts are so carefully and extensively done so as to give me a strong impression. Such survey is designed prior to collecting data so that after collection, data can be analyzed according to statistical methodology suitable to the design of the survey. Strategies for response quantification is also included (yes/no for 0/1, responses in 0 to 10 scale, bracketing salaries, age groups, and such, handling missing data) for elaborated statistical analysis to avoid subjective data transformation and arbitrary outlier eliminations.</p>
<p>In contrast, survey in astronomy means designing a mesh, not questionaires, unable to be transcribed into statistical models. This mesh has multiple layers like telescope, detector, and source detection algorithm, and eventually produces a catalog. Designing statistical methodology is not a part of it that draws interpretable conclusion. Collecting what goes through that mesh is astronomical survey. Analyzing the catalog does not necessarily involve sophisticated statistics but often times adopts chi-sq fittings and cast aways of unpleasant/uninteresting data points.</p>
<p>As other conflicts in jargon, &#8211;a simplest example is H<sub>o</sub>: I used to know it as <b>Hubble constant</b> but now, it is recognized first as a notation for a <b>null hypothesis</b> &#8212; <b>survey</b> has been one of them and like the measurement error, some clarification about the term, <b>survey</b> is expected to be given by knowledgeable astrostatisticians to draw more statisticians involvement in grand survey projects soon to come. Luckily, the first opportunity will be given soon at the <a href="http://aas.org/meetings/aas213/event_special_ss05.php">Special Session: Meaning from Surveys and Population Studies: BYOQ</a> during <a href="http://aas.org/meetings/aas213">the 213 AAS meeting,</a> at Long Beach, California on Jan. 5th, 2009. </p>
<p><!--I have a bit vague memory using probably the daophot package under IRAF (more than 10 years ago, this big gap is likely to cause biased opinion), my knowing IRAF happened before I see census package) but remember how magnitudes of stars were retrieved. They were retrieved, not collected. That's the largest difference between survey considered in astronomy versus statistics. Gold mining...as much as you can get is astronomy;<br />
My point is that because different philosophy under one word, it is not recommended to apply traditional statistical survey methods or experimental designs into astronomical survey. Furthermore, it is not wise to apply methodology of 19th century for 21st century survey data. --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2008/survey-and-design-of-experiments/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

