oklahomastats

State school could mean anything from Berkeley/Michigan to some school nobody's ever heard of, and that will play a big role in interpreting your math grades. Did you get As in your probability/inference classes in your master's to help make up for the B in probability? Regardless, I think these are reasonable schools to have on your list, but you definitely need to add safer schools too.

Probably won't make a big difference either way since it's in sort of that in-between area. How does it fit in with the rest of your profile? If you are a math major with a 4.0 GPA applying to a top program, a 165Q probably brings down people's perception of how good you are at math. If you are an English major from an unknown school with a 3.1 and only the minimum math, a 165Q probably brings up people's perception of how good you are at math. I wouldn't worry about it too much though, I don't think this is going to make a big positive or negative difference regardless of your decision.

I've never heard anyone think it's important for undergrads to have publications before applying to PhD programs, even in the top 10. It's actually absurd just because of the timeline of stats research and publications. Many students at good PhD programs do not have publications when they *graduate* from the program.

If you want to go to a top 10 program, obviously more research and classes can only help. But your current coursework is fine (stats grad school is not like math where you have to have graduate level courses) and it is not like machine learning/CS grad school (where you have to have publications). If you still have time to apply this year (obviously not possible with some deadlines), I'd recommend just applying to a wide range of schools in the top 30 or so (and top 10 biostat), and if you aren't happy with the results, getting a master's or getting some more research experience.

This is mostly a statistics forum, so I'm going to give this advice from that perspective. You're already in good shape for statistics. (You probably are in decent shape for applied math, but you definitely have some gaps for a math PhD applicant.) You say you don't have proof-based math courses, but you *will* have Real Analysis after this semester - I'd prioritize getting an A in that, and your math background will be totally fine. (RA + Linear + Abstract Algebra seems like a heavy load in one semester, so if you have any flexibility, I'd just make sure you can devote the time to do well in RA). I realize it's already extremely late in this cycle, but you could apply to stats PhD programs right now. You'd also be a great candidate for top 10 biostatistics PhD programs. Especially after completing RA and if you're able to start doing research later this year with a Harvard stats prof, I see no reason why you'd need to get a master's before your PhD. I would just take a year off of school and re-apply.

Obviously your profile is outstanding, and your list is full of reaches but they are reasonable to apply to. Your Strong/Reach/Neutral categories are all basically the same level, and then there's a huge gap to your safeties (Pitt and GWU especially). Why not apply to a few more schools in the range of Texas/TAMU/PSU/Ohio State/Illinois?

I realized you said you didn't take the GRE, so maybe you can't apply to some of these schools. In that case, if you have to leave your list as-is for this year, then you can always just figure out something to do for a year if you don't get in anywhere - yes, this could be research or an industry job, but it could also just be anything that you enjoy (depends a lot on your financial situation, obviously, but it won't be that hard to find a job that pays the same amount as a PhD program). Taking a year (or two, or five) is not a big deal.

Your anxiety and self-criticism is jumping off the screen. Please take a deep breath. I hope you talked about yourself more positively in your applications, because you have a great profile. Yes, your list is top-heavy, and you should add more schools in the range of Rice (TAMU, Ohio State, Illinois, etc are great). If you're interested in Bayesian nonparametrics, why aren't you applying to Texas and Duke? It's only November 22nd. You can send out 5 more applications and you'll be in great shape.

Sounds like you understand the pros and cons pretty well. I don't see anything in your post that makes me think you really want to be a statistician or even study statistics more. Having an undergrad degree in statistics is not a reason to go to grad school for stats.

I think your profile will look a lot better when you have As in real analysis+probability on your transcript and that will be enough math. You can overcome the undergrad grades - I think people will actually be pretty understanding, but it's hard to evaluate your math ability when there's just so few classes right now. I know you don't have a lot of research, but I also think people will find your CDC/health experience interesting. I'm not suggesting that you apply to bad programs, or that you don't apply to top 10 schools at all. But I think Pitt/Emory/Vanderbilt/Duke/Iowa level is respectable and you should consider more schools in that range.

Even with your experience, PhD programs are going to value math training very highly, and you are facing an uphill battle with the low grades and online courses. Pitt is the lowest ranked school on your current list, but I really it should be where your list starts (#18 on US News Biostat rankings).

I agree with your recommender that you can definitely apply for PhD programs. There's no glaring weaknesses in your profile. You could apply to top 10, but I think 11-35 on US News is probably your sweet spot along with any top 10 biostat program. If you really want to go to a top 10 stats PhD, you could definitely improve your profile if you aced a top MS program and got some more research experience, but I think you can get into some schools right now that would set you up well for an academic career.

Why not just apply to some PhD programs and a couple MS programs as backups? It's the same amount of work. Your math background is good, but you have no research experience, so I have a hard time seeing you getting into a top 10 program at the moment. A MS that allows you to get some research experience would help a lot. But why are you so set on top 10? Top 30 programs are all fantastic for 99% of applicants.

No, I think stats/math/mathematical CS letters will be viewed similarly by most people. You didn't have much positive to say about letter writer 1 - does he know you well? Is the research you did with him a huge part of your SOP? You already have 2 letters from research advisors, so I personally think it's totally fine to have a third letter from a math professor who knows you pretty well and you know will write something nice.

I think all of your thoughts are spot-on. 2,3,4 seem like the best letter writers. You can definitely apply to any top statistics program, and I definitely agree that you don't need to apply lower than UT/Rice range. (Don't know anything about OR)