A blog by Rob J Hyndman 

Twitter Gplus RSS

Posts Tagged ‘references’:


Following authors on Google Scholar

Published on 31 January 2012

A great new fea­ture has been added to Google Scholar Cita­tions. For those authors who have set up a cita­tions page, it is now pos­si­ble to get email alerts for any new arti­cles they pub­lish, or for any new cita­tions of their arti­cles. So you can track cita­tions to your own work this way, and stay up-​​​​to-​​​​date with key authors in your field. Set­ting up a Google Cita­tions page is super-​​​​easy and was already worth doing. This new func­tion­al­ity is another rea­son to do it. After all, as researchers we want peo­ple to read our stuff, so we might as well make it as easy as pos­si­ble for peo­ple to find what we write. To set up your Google Cita­tions page, go to scholar​.google​.com/​c​i​t​a​tions. To fol­low an author, find their cita­tions page and look for the “Fol­low this author” box at the top right of the page. Hope­fully, Google will add RSS feeds as an option in the future as I’d much rather get alerts that way then by yet more email in my inbox.

 
3 Comments  comments 

The art of R programming

Published on 30 November 2011

This is a gem of a book. It will become the book I give PhD stu­dents when they are learn­ing how to write good R code. That is, if I ever see it again. I had hoped to write a review of it, but I haven’t seen it since it arrived in the mail a cou­ple of weeks ago because a research stu­dent or research assis­tant has always had it on loan. I guess that’s a tes­ta­ment to how use­ful it is.

 
6 Comments  comments 

Researcher portals

Published on 26 November 2011

A researcher por­tal is a web­site that attempts to list all the pub­li­ca­tions of a given researcher. Some por­tals also allow shar­ing papers, inter­act­ing with other researchers, cal­cu­lat­ing cita­tion sta­tis­tics, etc. Every researcher wants their work read and cited, so these web­sites can be use­ful tools for get­ting your work noticed. They can also func­tion as a de facto home page if you don’t already have a per­sonal web­site. Con­versely, they can be a good way to find new work by researchers in your field. How­ever, unless a site pro­vides a rel­a­tively com­plete list of your pub­li­ca­tions, and cov­ers a large pro­por­tion of the research com­mu­nity in your dis­ci­pline, it is of limited value.

 
3 Comments  comments 

Switching from JabRef to Mendeley

Published on 20 September 2011

Mende­ley has a lot more facil­i­ties than JabRef, and I’ve rec­om­mended that every­one in my research group switch to Mende­ley. How­ever, if you’ve been using JabRef for a while then you won’t want to lose all your pdf links and other infor­ma­tion stored in JabRef. Here are a cou­ple of ideas to make the con­ver­sion simpler.

 
8 Comments  comments 

Use Mendeley to manage your references

Published on 4 August 2011

Every researcher col­lects large num­bers of papers, ref­er­ences, and notes, and it is impor­tant to have a good sys­tem to keep them all orga­nized. For many years I had sev­eral thou­sand papers all num­bered and stored in fil­ing cab­i­nets, with a JabRef data­base pro­vid­ing an index to them. These days, it’s much eas­ier to have every­thing stored elec­tron­i­cally, and so I have accu­mu­lated many pdfs (about 1300 so far) of pub­lished arti­cles. But the prob­lem of being able to find some­thing fast is still impor­tant. Mende­ley is a free soft­ware tool for man­ag­ing your ref­er­ence data­base. It actu­ally solves many prob­lems simul­ta­né­ously and is likely to become an impor­tant part of how I work.

 
7 Comments  comments 

Recommended survey papers

Published on 25 July 2011

Sur­vey arti­cles are par­tic­u­larly help­ful in get­ting a foothold in a new research area, or in look­ing for impor­tant papers that you may have over­looked. What­ever area of research you are in, look out for sur­vey papers and jour­nals ded­i­cated to pub­lish­ing sur­vey papers.

 
1 Comment  comments 

How to avoid annoying a referee

Published on 22 October 2010

It’s not a good idea to annoy the ref­er­ees of your paper. They make rec­om­men­da­tions to the edi­tor about your work and it is best to keep them happy. There is an inter­est­ing dis­cus­sion on stats​.stack​ex​change​.com on this sub­ject. This inspired my own list below. Explain what you’ve done clearly, avoid­ing unnec­es­sary jar­gon. Don’t claim your paper con­tributes more than it actu­ally does. (I ref­er­eed a paper this week where the author claimed to have invented prin­ci­pal com­po­nent analy­sis!) Ensure all fig­ures have clear cap­tions and labels. Include cita­tions to the referee’s own work. Obvi­ously you don’t know who is going to ref­eree your paper, but you should aim to cite the main work in the area. It places your work in con­text, and keeps the ref­er­ees happy if they are the authors. Make sure the cited papers say what you think they say. Sight what you cite! Include proper cita­tions for all soft­ware pack­ages. If you are unsure how to cite an R pack­age, try the com­mand citation(“packagename”). Never pla­gia­rise from other papers — not even sen­tence frag­ments. Use your own words. I’ve ref­er­eed a the­sis which had slabs taken from my own lec­ture notes includ­ing the typos. Don’t pla­gia­rise from your own papers. Either ref­er­ence

(More)…

 
1 Comment  comments 

Your name is your brand

Published on 16 September 2010

As a researcher, you want to become known as an expert in your field. You need peo­ple to rec­og­nize your name and asso­ciate it with your research. Con­se­quently, it is impor­tant to be con­sis­tent in the name you use on pub­li­ca­tions. For exam­ple, I could write under “R Hyn­d­man”, “R J Hyn­d­man”, “Rob Hyn­d­man”, “Rob J Hyn­d­man”, etc. I’ve cho­sen the last of these and I try to use it on all pub­li­ca­tions. Unfor­tu­nately, some jour­nals insist on only ini­tials, in which case I become “R J Hyn­d­man”. In other cases, a coau­thor han­dles all the cor­re­spon­dence with the jour­nal and, despite my requests, they just list me as “R Hyn­d­man” or “Rob Hyn­d­man”. So I have not achieved con­sis­tency, but I try. Researchers from coun­tries with more elab­o­rate nam­ing con­ven­tions than the West­ern tra­di­tion will have even more options, and so it is even more impor­tant to aim for con­sis­tency in pub­li­ca­tions. Con­sis­tency is also impor­tant when oth­ers are search­ing for one of your papers. If you have changed your name, or you use two very dif­fer­ent names, then it will be harder for other researchers to find the paper of yours that they are look­ing for. This can be a prob­lem when peo­ple have changed their name at mar­riage,

(More)…

 
1 Comment  comments 

Econometrics and R

Published on 31 August 2010

Econo­me­tri­cians seem to be rather slow to adopt new meth­ods and new tech­nol­ogy (com­pared to other areas of sta­tis­tics), but slowly the use of R is spread­ing. I’m now receiv­ing requests for ref­er­ences show­ing how to use R in econo­met­rics, and so I thought it might be help­ful to post a few sug­ges­tions here. A use­ful on-​​​​line and free resource is “Econo­met­rics in R” by Grant Farnsworth. It cov­ers some com­mon econo­met­ric meth­ods includ­ing het­eroskedas­tic­ity in regres­sion, pro­bit and logit mod­els, tobit regres­sion, and quan­tile regres­sion. In the time series area, it cov­ers ARIMA, ARFIMA, ARCH and GARCH mod­els, as well as a few of the stan­dard tests for unit roots and auto­cor­re­la­tion. It’s brief but it does pro­vide code that will help peo­ple famil­iar with econo­met­rics to get started using R. If you are pre­pared to pay, an excel­lent book is Kleiber and Zeilis’s Applied Econo­met­rics with R. It cov­ers sim­i­lar ground to Farnsworth but in more detail. This is the book I usu­ally rec­om­mend to any­one with an econo­met­rics back­ground who is want­ing to get started with R. It would also be very suit­able for some­one study­ing econo­met­rics at about upper under­grad­u­ate level. Achim Zeileis is a well-​​​​known expert in R pro­gram­ming, so you can be sure the code

(More)…

 
2 Comments  comments 

Academic citations in the popular press

Published on 12 July 2010

It is very unusual for a news­pa­per arti­cle to cite an aca­d­e­mic paper, unless it is in Nature, Sci­ence or the Lancet. Mostly, what we write is too tech­ni­cal and assumes too much back­ground knowl­edge for it to be acces­si­ble to any­one but spe­cial­ists. So I was pleas­antly sur­prised to find a ref­er­ence to the Inter­na­tional Jour­nal of Fore­cast­ing in a recent Wall Street Jour­nal arti­cle. It is a cita­tion of a 1996 arti­cle, so in terms of sci­en­tific research it is a bit like quot­ing the Magna Carta, but a cita­tion nev­er­the­less. I once tried to get news­pa­per cov­er­age of a spe­cial issue of the IJF on fore­cast­ing the US Pres­i­den­tial elec­tion. It was pub­lished about four months before the 2008 elec­tions. If any­thing was going to attract the atten­tion of the pop­u­lar press, surely this was the topic! Alas, all we man­aged was a short piece on a  research news web­site although there were copi­ous arti­cles on pre­dict­ing the elec­tion result based on less valid meth­ods. Even fore­cast­ing the recent world cup didn’t get any seri­ous atten­tion, despite some excel­lent (albeit unpub­lished) work over at kag​gle​.com. Paul the Octo­pus had tens of thou­sands of news arti­cles, but the care­ful sta­tis­ti­cal mod­el­ling at kag­gle had none at all that

(More)…

 
No Comments  comments