DMX

Did they save if all the 40 shortlisted people habe been contacted? I.e. if I haven't heard back from Duke yet then I can safely say I am rejected? Statsfrommaths, it seems like you've pretty much gotten into all the programs you've applied to. Any thoughts on where you would like to go? (I'd think it would be crazy to pass up on Stanford, but that's just me )

No one probably knows, but from a cursory look at past results it seems like you have a good shot. Khaki and a dress shirt would probably suffice. No need for suit/tie. On another note, I've yet to hear back from Duke (I am assuming/preparing for the worst). Do you mind sharing your stats? Also, did they mention anything like # of applicants invited etc.?

congrats! given your theoretical bend I think UChicago might be a good fit (I am also selfishly motivated since I am waiting to hear back from Wharton (my first choice) and Duke)

shostakovich, didn't you get accepted by UWashington? Strange that you would get rejected from Emory.

Profile here: Haven't heard from any of the schools. I was/am extremely nervous so I was going through profiles of students at various stat/biostat departments, and I was surprised at the gap between american vs foreign student profiles. I apologise if I sound arrogant, but many American students seemed to have come from decent (but not super competitive) schools, with decent GPAs, and without much research experience (at least what was on their C.V.). In contrast, foreign students almost always came from Beijing/Tsinghua/IIT (if Chinese/Indian), and more often than not had published research (especially from European schools). This was especially true at top biostats programs (so far looked at JHU/UWashington). Do you essentially have to be top-of-your-country type material to get into these programs?

im applying to stat/biostat programs, and from what i've heard they want to see good/great grades in calc I-III, linear algebra, analysis, and ODE. i have some bad (but not catastrophic) grades in the above 'core' courses calc I: B- (first semester of freshmen year. i was immature and didn't try at all in the class. i skipped a midterm because i didn't wake up in time...) linear algebra: B+ (same reason as above... immaturity). real analysis: B- (i actually did really well in the midterm/final, so i was expecting an easy A. turns out class participation and homework made up a big portion of the grade - both of which i rarely did). intro to computer programming: B (had no idea what programming was before this class). However, i do have some good grades in other, arguably 'harder' classes (especially when i started becoming more focused academcially) upper level linear algebra: A topology: A multivariable calc: A+ time series: A number theory : A- algorithms (upper level CS class): A+ econometrics: A Given this, do you think the bad grades above warrant an explanation? Or are my grades in upper level classes good enough for them to not worry about my math background?

I'm applying to phd programs in Stats/Biostats. Is it better to attach a C.V. or a resume? I've been working full time since graduation so my experience is more amenable to a resume rather than a C.V., as i do not have research/publication experience. Or does it not really matter?

Thanks for the encouragement cyberwulf, but from doing some research I think being a non-domestic student will really kill me. Stanford I KNOW is out of my reach (I know several people who were denied and they had far far better profiles than I), but I am going to add Berekely/UCLA to the list. Thanks again

All, I am in the process of finalizing my school selection for the upcoming application season. Would love some advice regarding realistic chances and if I should add any schools Undergrad GPA: 3.7 (Physics/Econ from top 10 Ivy) - from math side have taken analysis/number theory/upper level linear algebra, and of course calc I-III. Mostly A/A-'s in the math courses. Grad GPA: 3.9 (master's in statistics from Columbia) - courses include the usual probability/inference/regression/stochastic courses, as well as a machine learning course and a few 'applied' courses GRE: 800/580/5.0 (Q/V/W) Letter of Recs: 2 will be very good/stellar (prof/employer), 1 will be ok (prof) Research Experience: None, aside from a few semester-long class projects - some interesting results that I will talk about in my essay but none are publication-worthy. (I know you don't necessarily need research experience to get into stat/biostat problems, but I am a little worried) Other: have been working at a consulting firm for the past 3 years. Demographic: International applicant My school selection is as follows Reach/unrealistic: Harvard (biostats) Johns Hopkins (biostats) Wharton (stats) Duke (stats) Realistic: Columbia (biostats) Yale (stats) - I know this department is small but several professors seem to be working on problems I find interesting (MCMC methods) Brown (biostats) WashU (stats) I know my list is a bit top-heavy so I am looking to add a couple of safety schools, particularly in the California area. My admissions chances are further hindered by the fact that I am an international applicant.

thanks cyberwulf, from looking at the forums it seems like you are the biostatics guru around here I am an international student but with a BS/MS in physics/statistics from a top 10 "name" school in the US - would I be competing against applicants from Peking University/Indian Institute of Tech/Indian Statistical Institute etc? Or would I be compared against domestic students from US schools? My gpa was decent (3.7 for undergrad, 3.9 for grad), but no real research experience aside from a few group projects Also, given the above stats, do you think I have a better shot at the stats program versus the biostats program?

I'm compiling a list of schools to apply to (PhD in stat/biostat), and obviously both Harvard biostat/stat programs are reaches for anybody. - Admission rates for the Stat PhD program is apparently around 10% (http://www.stat.harvard.edu/degrees_page.php?mode=Admissions&page=faq.html) which seems surprisingly high given the fact that the stat department is quite small and taking into account the inflated number of people applying just for the harvard name. - I couldn't really get a handle on size / admission rate for the biostatistics program - anybody have a clue? I was initially going to apply to the biostatistics program because they are typically easier to get into, but not sure if this is the case for harvard... Anyone have any insights?

By "naive" I'm worried as my research interests coming off as too "pie-in-the-sky"

I'm in the process of writing my statement of purpose and I've stated that my research interests are in Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods that mirror physical processes (e.g. simulated annealing, quantum annealing). Specifically, I'm interested in to what extent they mirror the actually annealing processes, and statistical properties of why they work so well. This interest was inspired from a project that I did in one of my classes. Some concerns: - am I being too specific with regard to my research interests? Should I make my SoP more 'generic' (e.g. 'given the amount of data we are inundated with in the modern world, I believe that the development and application of sophisticated statistical models are paramount')? - could I be seen as too 'naive'? I've only taken a few courses in MCMC methods and perhaps these questions have already been answered, or are unrealistic to be answered (an analog might be a PhD CS applicant writing in his SoP that he's interested in developing Artificial Intelligence that can feel emotion. while this would be a specific research interest, it reeks of naivete).