The Magnificent Map of Rap Names
My favorite category is “Guys Named Nas”.
Cheers.
Here is a quote from the blog post “The core components” on BigDataApps.com:
People call this business logic, which is a phrase that is frustrating to me since its just a series of if then else’s, but marketing needs something to do.
Cheers.
Rankings as of 4:14pm on 2/20/2012. Sagarin Ratings for games though 2/19/2012.
Previous rankings are here.
Syracuse, Kentucky, and Missouri remain atop the rankings. Ohio State drops 2 spots after losing to Michigan this past week knocking them out of the top 5, while Duke and Michigan State both move up one spot rounding out the top 5. Indiana is the weeks biggest loser, falling 4 spots to number 16 after a 12 point loss at a barely above .500 Iowa team. Florida St. moves up 10 spots to number 22 and sits in a three way tie for first in the ACC. Murray State moves up 7 spots to number 19 and back into the top 25 after it’s bracket buster win over St. Mary’s-CA. Two teams make their season debut in the top 25: Vanderbilt and Saint Louis at 24 and 25, respectively. Saint Louis joins fellow Atlantic 10 team Temple in the top 25 as the league now sports two top 25 teams. The Mountain West is moving in the opposite direction as UNLV and San Diego State have fallen out of the top 25 in recent weeks leaving only one team, New Mexico, to represent to MWC.
Breakdown by conference: 3, 4, 5, 3, 0, 3, 1, 2, 4
ACC Big East Big Ten Big 12 Pac 12 SEC MWC MVC Other
| Team | Rank | Change | Record | AP | Sagarin |
| Syracuse | 1 | – | 27-1 | 2 | 4 |
| Kentucky | 2 | – | 26-1 | 1 | 1 |
| Missouri | 3 | – | 25-2 | 3 | 7 |
| Duke | 4 | ↑1 | 23-4 | 5 | 9 |
| Michigan St. | 5 | ↑1 | 22-5 | 6 | 5 |
| Ohio St. | 6 | ↓2 | 22-5 | 8 | 2 |
| Kansas | 7 | ↑1 | 22-5 | 4 | 3 |
| Marquette | 8 | ↑1 | 22-5 | 10 | 15 |
| North Carolina | 9 | ↑1 | 23-4 | 7 | 6 |
| Baylor | 10 | ↓3 | 22-5 | 13 | 14 |
| Wichita St. | 11 | ↑2 | 24-4 | 19 | 10 |
| Georgetown | 12 | ↑3 | 20-5 | 9 | 12 |
| Louisville | 13 | ↑1 | 21-6 | 17 | 18 |
| Wisconsin | 14 | ↓3 | 20-7 | 16 | 8 |
| Michigan | 15 | ↑1 | 20-7 | 11 | 22 |
| Indiana | 16 | ↓4 | 20-7 | 23 | 11 |
| Creighton | 17 | ↑2 | 23-5 | 26 | 27 |
| Florida | 18 | ↑4 | 21-6 | 12 | 13 |
| Murray St. | 19 | ↑7 | 26-1 | 14 | 47 |
| Temple | 20 | ↑3 | 21-5 | 22 | 32 |
| New Mexico | 21 | ↑4 | 22-4 | 18 | 16 |
| Florida St. | 22 | ↑10 | 19-7 | 15 | 21 |
| Gonzaga | 23 | ↓2 | 21-5 | 27 | 30 |
| Vanderbilt | 24 | ↑5 | 19-8 | 31 | 28 |
| Saint Louis | 25 | ↑5 | 22-5 | 29 | 17 |
26-35: Virginia, St. Mary’s-CA, UNLV, Notre Dame, Southern Miss, California, San Diego St., BYU, Alabama, Memphis
BCS: My offer still stands…….if you want to contact me you can send me a tweet @StatsInTheWild.
Cheers.
Rankings as of 9:53am on 2/13/2012. Sagarin Ratings for games though 2/13/2012.
Previous rankings are here.
I had a bit of a data problem and the rankings were wrong last week. I’ve updated them and they are now correct.
Breakdown by conference: 4, 4, 5, 3, 0, 2, 1, 2, 4
ACC Big East Big Ten Big 12 Pac 12 SEC MWC MVC Other
| Team | Rank | Change | Record | AP | Sagarin |
| Syracuse | 1 | – | |||
| Kentucky | 2 | ↑1 | |||
| Missouri | 3 | ↑3 | |||
| Ohio St. | 4 | – | |||
| Duke | 5 | – | |||
| Michigan St. | 6 | ↑1 | |||
| Baylor | 7 | ↓5 | |||
| Kansas | 8 | ↑2 | |||
| Marquette | 9 | ↑2 | |||
| North Carolina | 10 | ↓2 | |||
| Wisconsin | 11 | ↑2 | |||
| Indiana | 12 | ↑3 | |||
| Wichita St. | 13 | ↑6 | |||
| Louisville | 14 | ↑6 | |||
| Georgetown | 15 | ↓3 | |||
| Michigan | 16 | ↑5 | |||
| UNLV | 17 | ↑1 | |||
| St. Mary’s-CA | 18 | ↓2 | |||
| Creighton | 19 | ↓10 | |||
| San Diego St. | 20 | ↓6 | |||
| Gonzaga | 21 | ↑7 | |||
| Florida | 22 | ↓5 | |||
| Temple | 23 | ↑11 | |||
| Virginia | 24 | ↓1 | |||
| New Mexico | 25 | – |
26-35: Murray St., Southern Miss, Mississippi St., Vanderbilt, Saint Louis, Illinois, Florida St., Alabama, Iowa St., Memphis
BCS: My offer still stands…….if you want to contact me you can send me a tweet @StatsInTheWild.
Cheers.
I’ve been reading a lot about the boycott against Elsevier lately, and today I came across this article from slate.com called “The other academic freedom movement”. As I’ve moved along through graduate school and published a few articles, I’m a little bit surprised at some of the strange forces at work in the whole peer-review process. It seems to me that, and others have pointed this out, that scientists write articles for free, then get them peer-reviewed for free, then give away their copyright to a publisher who then make a ton of money. (Thats how Elsevier made $1.1 billion last year.) I resent the idea that some CEO of a publishing company is making millions of dollars a year off of the work of scientists at universities who are making a fraction of that. (How different is this than the CEO of a college bowl game making millions while the athletes get nothing but tuition?) Of course, the problem isn’t that simple. This is science and a big part of science is to share work with as many other people as possible. Science needs this communication with other scientists and a peer-review process. What if there were a way to get both of these without a publisher?
In my mind, at this point in time, a journal is just a stamp of approval. It’s just an abstract concept. In the past, journals needed to be physically published. It was the only way. But now I can publish whatever I want (this blog for instance), and it will reach potentially everyone one earth with an internet connection. So why not start an “abstract journal.” No head quarters, no profits, no business plan. Just a group of editors and experts who put their stamp of approval on the work you have done. If you’re work is accepted, it’s up to the author to make his work freely available on the internet somewhere (like a wordpress blog, which is free). The editor of the journal would simply post a list of accepted work with links to accepted articles, and anyone in the world could access this whether they are a top research scientist or just a curious individual with an internet connection.
Cheers.
I was looking back at my NFL rankings over the past few months, and I found something interesting in my week 16 rankings. I actually had the NY Giants ranked higher than San Francisco.
Anyway, below are my final 2011-2012 NFL rankings.
Rankings updated as of 2/9/2012; Records updated as of 2/9/2012; CHFF rankings as of 12/28/2011
| Team | Rank | Change | Record | CHFF Rank |
| Green Bay | 1 | ↑ | 15-2 | 1 |
| New England | 2 | ↓ | 15-4 | 3 |
| Pittsburgh | 3 | – | 12-5 | 6 |
| Baltimore | 4 | – | 13-5 | 5 |
| New Orleans | 5 | ↑ | 14-4 | 2 |
| Atlanta | 6 | ↓ | 10-7 | 11 |
| NY Giants | 7 | ↑↑ | 13-7 | 10 |
| NY Jets | 8 | ↓ | 8-8 | 15 |
| Chicago | 9 | ↓ | 8-8 | 23 |
| San Francisco | 10 | – | 14-4 | 4 |
| Philadelphia | 11 | ↑ | 8-8 | 12 |
| San Diego | 12 | ↑ | 8-8 | 18 |
| Detroit | 13 | ↓↓ | 10-7 | 8 |
| Kansas City | 14 | ↑↑↑ | 7-9 | 26 |
| Oakland | 15 | ↓ | 8-8 | 14 |
| Tennessee | 16 | ↑↑↑↑↑↑ | 9-7 | 20 |
| Tampa Bay | 17 | ↓↓ | 4-12 | 31 |
| Houston | 18 | ↑ | 10-7 | 7 |
| Dallas | 19 | ↑↑ | 8-8 | 13 |
| Miami | 20 | ↓↓ | 6-10 | 22 |
| Seattle | 21 | ↓ | 7-9 | 19 |
| Denver | 22 | ↑↑ | 9-9 | 16 |
| Jacksonville | 23 | ↑↑↑↑↑↑ | 5-11 | 29 |
| Cincinnati | 24 | ↓↓↓↓↓↓↓↓ | 9-8 | 9 |
| Indianapolis | 25 | – | 2-14 | 30 |
| Arizona | 26 | ↑↑ | 8-8 | 21 |
| Buffalo | 27 | ↓↓↓↓ | 6-10 | 24 |
| Washington | 28 | ↑↑ | 5-11 | 25 |
| Minnesota | 29 | ↓↓↓ | 3-13 | 28 |
| St. Louis | 30 | ↑↑ | 2-14 | 32 |
| Cleveland | 31 | ↓↓↓↓ | 4-12 | 27 |
| Carolina | 32 | ↓ | 6-10 | 17 |
BCS: My offer still stands…….if you want to contact me you can send me a tweet @StatsInTheWild.
Cheers.