Skip to content

Daniel on Stan at the NYC Machine Learning Meetup

I (Daniel) will be giving a Stan overview talk on Thursday, August 20, 7 pm.

Bob gave a talk there 3.5 years ago. My talk will be light and include where we’ve been and where we’re going.


P.S. If you make it, find me. I have Stan stickers to give out.

P.P.S. Stan is on twitter.

Stan sticker


  1. Bob says:

    Not really a comment—just an FYI.
    This NYT story seems relevant to many of the discussions on this blog.

    Please feel free to delete this post.

    • Keith O'Rourke says:


      Just read that, I guess better than most but it is almost impossible to know whether to believe a health study if you don’t have access to study records and data or at least a knowledge of the group that were involved – its (currently) all done behind closed doors.

      One of the comments suggested Cochrane and here is my favorite paper from (one of) them (confirming the above concern)

      Key paper:
      Tom Jefferson, et al (of The Cochrane Collaboration). Risk of bias in industry-funded oseltamivir trials: comparison of core reports versus full clinical study reports

      The conclusion:
      “This approach is not possible when assessing trials reported in journal publications, in which articles necessarily reflect post hoc reporting with a far more sparse level of detail. We suggest that when bias is so limiting as to make meta-analysis results unreliable, either it should not be carried out or a prominent explanation of its clear limitations should be included alongside the meta-analysis.”

  2. Rahul says:

    Naive question: Is Stan used actively in Machine Learning (motivated by the location of the talk)? Are there any examples or case studies? I’d love to read them.

Leave a Reply