Skip to content

StanCon is coming! Sat, 1/21/2017

[Update: There’s a more recent post with the schedule.]


Save the date! The first Stan conference is going to be in NYC in January. Registration will open at the end of September.



Saturday, January 21, 2017

9 am – 5 pm



Davis Auditorium, Columbia University

530 West 120th Street

4th floor (campus level), room 412

New York, NY 10027



Registration will open at the end of September.


Early registration (on or before December 20, 2016):

– Student: $50

– Academic: $100

– Industry: $200

This will include coffee, lunch, and some swag.


Late Registration (December 21, 2016 and on):

– Student: $75

– Academic: $150

– Industry: $300

This will include coffee and lunch. Probably won’t get swag.


Contributed talks:

We’re looking for contributed talks. We will start accepting submissions at the end of September.

The contributed talks at StanCon will be based on interactive, self-contained notebooks, such as knitr or Jupyter, that will also take the place of proceedings.  For example, you might demonstrate a novel modeling technique or a simplified version of a novel application. Each submission should include the notebook and separate files containing the Stan program, data, initializations if used, and a permissive license for everything such as CC BY 4.0.


Tentative Schedule:

8:00- 9:00 Registration / Coffee / Breakfast

9:00 – 9:20 Opening remarks

9:20 – 10:30 Session 1

10:30 – 11:00 Coffee break

11:00 – 12:30 Session 2

12:30 – 2:00 Lunch

2:00 – 3:15 Session 3

3:15 – 3:45 Coffee break

3:45 – 5:00 Session 4



We are looking for some sponsorship to either defer costs or provide travel assistance. Please email [email protected] for more information.



Michael Betancourt (Columbia University)

Tamara Broderick (MIT)

Jonah Gabry (Columbia University)

Andrew Gelman (Columbia University)

Ben Goodrich (Columbia University)

Daniel Lee (Columbia University)

Eric Novik (Stan Group Inc)

Lizzie Wolkovich (Harvard University)



  1. Mildred Bonk says:

    Aw, and here I thought this was a convention of Stan fans. Stan Lee, Stan Marsh, Grunkle Stan…

  2. jrkrideau says:

    “We couldn’t use ISO dates in headlines could we?”, he asks plaintively.

    As an non-USAian I find find MM/DD/YYYY very confusing. And as a Canadian where we, dog help us, use DD/MM/YYYY and MM/DD/YYYY with gay abandon in civilian life, one never knows what 3/4/17 means.

    I love ISO!

    • Andrew says:


      I agree with you in general but in this case I think it’s pretty clear as there’s no month 21.

      • jrkrideau says:

        Nitpicking on my silly nitpicking! :)

        The date is, of course, completely clear but I had to pause and transpose the dates to DD-MM-YYYY format as I was reading it since that format is a bit more common in Canada than MM-DD-YY. The Canadian Gov’t seems to be slowly coverting from (mainly) DD-MM-YYYY to ISO, thank heavens.

        MM-DD-YY seems illogical. Highest unit to lowest (ISO); lowest unit to highest. DD-MM-YYYY. MM-DD-YYYY middle unit to lowest to highest?

        • Andrew says:


          I always use the unambiguous “21 Jan 2017” notation which I learned from Strunk and White, maybe?

          • jrkrideau says:

            I like 21 Jan 2017 type in text, that is say in a sentence since is seems to reduce decoding time considerably at least for English language readers.

            I still find ISO format better for a straight date such as a header on a paper or memo. If your readers are ISO literate you can just do 2016-09-20 09:30 rather than 20 Sept 2016 9:30 AM — since I also dislike AM and PM and people sometimes forget to add the AM or PM :)

            I cannot say if Stunk and White introduced that or not. I have not looked at the book in 20 years or more. IIRC I did not find Elements of Style particularly useful or inspiring.

            I think I either knew whatever they were advocating (good primary and high school education) or disagreed with them though it is so long ago I don’t remember what I disliked.

    • Daniel says:

      It was way too late in the evening (local time) when I posted that! I was more focused on getting the info out than making the date unambiguously clear AND in the format of everyone’s choosing. Fortunately, no month 21 or 2017. And if there’s a 2017, 21 isn’t really read as a year. And Saturday adds some info.

      As for confusion, check out On Kawara’s date paintings. (Google search and you should find a whole bunch of images.) ISO may be a standard, but the practical standard everywhere isn’t that simple. (I don’t live my life in ISO.)

      P.S. ISO 8601? Do you really specify dates without years as “–01-21” day to day? With the double dash and 2 number months? Or is there yet another ISO that people actually adhere to?

Leave a Reply