+1 720 515 7230 frontdesk@museumof.ai
Contact
July 2016

Month

Business coaching, manipulating memory for market research, and female VCs.

27 July 2016By
1. Systematic review: Does business coaching make a difference? In PLOSOne, Grover and Furnham present findings of their systematic review of coaching impacts within organizations. They found glimmers of hope for positive results from coaching, but also spotted numerous holes in research designs and data quality. Over the years, outcome measures have included job satisfaction,...
Read More

Baseball analytics and AI for actuary decisions.

21 July 2016By
1. What new analytics are fueling baseball decisions? [I spoke at Nerd Nite SF about recent developments in baseball analytics. -Tracy Allison Altman, Ed.] Highlights from my talk: – Data science and baseball analytics are following similar trajectories. There’s more and more data, but people struggle to find predictive value. Oftentimes, executives are less familiar...
Read More
monitor showing code

The Cardinal Sin of data science, and cognitive bias in 5 easy steps.

20 July 2016By
1. Confusing correlation with causation is not the Cardinal Sin of data science, say Gregory Piatetsky (@kdnuggets) and Anmol Rajpurohit (@hey_anmol): It’s overfitting. Oftentimes, researchers “test numerous hypotheses without proper statistical control, until they happen to find something interesting and report it. Not surprisingly, next time the effect, which was (at least partly) due to...
Read More

Are you causing a ripple? How to assess the impact of research.

19 July 2016By
People are recognizing the critical need for meta-research, or the ‘science of science’. One focus area is understanding whether research produces desired outcomes, and identifying how to ensure that truly happens going forward. Research impact assessment (RIA) is particularly important when holding organizations accountable for their management of public and donor funding. An RIA community...
Read More

Academic clickbait, FCC doesn’t use economics, and tobacco surcharges don’t work.

13 July 2016By
1. Academics use crazy tricks for clickbait. Turn to @TheWinnower for an insightful analysis of academic article titles, and how their authors sometimes mimic techniques used for clickbait. Positively framed titles (those stating a specific finding) fare better than vague ones: For example, ‘smoking causes lung cancer’ vs. ‘the relationship between smoking and lung cancer’....
Read More

Stand up for science, evidence for surgery, and cognitive computing for execs.

6 July 2016By
1. Know someone who effectively promotes evidence? Nominations are open for the 2016 John Maddox Prize for Standing up for Science, recognizing an individual who promotes sound science and evidence on a matter of public interest, facing difficulty or hostility in doing so. Researchers in any area of science or engineering, or those who work...
Read More

Museum musings.

Pondering the places where people interact with artificial intelligence: Collaboration on evidence-based decision-making, automation of data-driven processes, machine learning, things like that.

Recent Articles

muscle car by bing/create
20 June 2023
Stolen cars and AI ‘moral self-correction’
person in silhouette with orange background, pondering AI input for an evidence based decision
9 May 2023
Can you trust AI with your next decision? Part 3 in a series on fact-checking/citation
image generated by bing image creator bottle on apothecary shelf
25 April 2023
How is generative AI referencing sources? Part 2 in our series
22 April 2023
Sneaky STEM: Inspire learning with immersive experiences
15 March 2023
Can AI replace your CEO?