-
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- Bob O'H on Off to the other side of the world
- Fred the Bulbous Squidge on Off to the other side of the world
- Bob O'H on Off to the other side of the world
- Bob O'H on Off to the other side of the world
- Bob O'H on Off to the other side of the world
Archives
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
Categories
Meta
-
Monthly Archives: February 2012
Of Variance Interpreted
Last week Tom Webb tweeted this post about R<sup2. In it the Cosma Shalizi argues that it’s wrong to say that “R2 is the proportion of variance explained by the model”. I say not so fast.
