3 ms·

> It's shocking how many data scientist I've known how no idea how to correctly model churn, This is because most 'data scientists' have never actually studied

by dcl 6y ago

> It's shocking how many data scientist I've known how no idea how to correctly model churn, This is because most 'data scientists' have never actually studied much statistics. And for the rest, it's easy to forgot all the cool tools we learnt about at university when everyone in the corporate world just says 'give me the average revenue per customer', 'give me the average tenure' etc, etc.

equality_1138 6y ago
what have data scientists generally studied if not for statistics?
- dcl 6y ago
  In my experience, 'data scientist' has become a very loose term, especially in the not terribly sophisticated corporate world. Typically, 'data science' isn't even very scientific, but a useful set of heuristics to get good model outcomes on data. Rarely is actual 'statistics' being done to get scientifically rigours results. People employed as 'data scientists' often come from comp sci/physics/eng/econ etc. They might be great at fitting models that also have great out of sample prediction performance, but they may have never heard of maximum likelihood, or know when to use a Wilcoxon rank sum test.
  - mcrad 6y ago
    Not very sophisticated corporate world? I'd argue it's very sophisticated to be loose with the meaning of scientist. We have a global debate happening about pseudo science due to some widespread acceptance to call anyone with a degree and some quantitative info a scientist.
- TrackerFF 6y ago
  A lot, and I mean a lot of Data Scientists are just what we called Business Analysts, Analysts, etc. There's no cohesive group of Data Scientists, and they come from all walks of life. Economics, Business Administration, Life Sciences, Computer Science, Engineering, etc. There absolutely are professional Data Scientists out there, that haven't touched more than Stats and Probability 101. (But FWIW, a lot of DS - even though they may lack the formal education, pick up these things underway)
  - mcrad 6y ago
    Sounds pretty cagey to me. HR gives out the label scientist to someone who cherry pick data that supports the shareholders thereby ensuring accountability loopholes for the management. Nice work, techies!

by dcl 6y ago

equality_1138 6y ago

what have data scientists generally studied if not for statistics?

dcl 6y ago
In my experience, 'data scientist' has become a very loose term, especially in the not terribly sophisticated corporate world. Typically, 'data science' isn't even very scientific, but a useful set of heuristics to get good model outcomes on data. Rarely is actual 'statistics' being done to get scientifically rigours results. People employed as 'data scientists' often come from comp sci/physics/eng/econ etc. They might be great at fitting models that also have great out of sample prediction performance, but they may have never heard of maximum likelihood, or know when to use a Wilcoxon rank sum test.
- mcrad 6y ago
  Not very sophisticated corporate world? I'd argue it's very sophisticated to be loose with the meaning of scientist. We have a global debate happening about pseudo science due to some widespread acceptance to call anyone with a degree and some quantitative info a scientist.
TrackerFF 6y ago
A lot, and I mean a lot of Data Scientists are just what we called Business Analysts, Analysts, etc. There's no cohesive group of Data Scientists, and they come from all walks of life. Economics, Business Administration, Life Sciences, Computer Science, Engineering, etc. There absolutely are professional Data Scientists out there, that haven't touched more than Stats and Probability 101. (But FWIW, a lot of DS - even though they may lack the formal education, pick up these things underway)
- mcrad 6y ago
  Sounds pretty cagey to me. HR gives out the label scientist to someone who cherry pick data that supports the shareholders thereby ensuring accountability loopholes for the management. Nice work, techies!