abstract_art
-
Posts
113 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by abstract_art
-
-
1 hour ago, cyclooxygenase said:
I am interested in looking at data within the next 6 years, though, hence why I've left UNC off the list in particular.
Almost certain @GoPackGo89 meant UNC (and Michigan) biostats (regardless there are faculty in both stats and biostats at UNC that don't just do theory, so this comment seems a bit odd).
-
You don't need a bio background to get into any biostats phd program, it probably doesn't even help in a lot of cases since programs want to see first and foremost that you have the math background to handle their coursework. I majored in math/cs (took one stats class during undergrad) and got into good biostats programs, your background won't be a problem.
-
Just want to throw out that I've heard anecdotes of students being admitted to all of the programs that recommend the Math GRE w/o taking it (including Stanford!)
-
If you can afford a mac, I'd recommend to just dish out the cash and get one (preferably a pro). Lots of programming languages/computational tools used in stats are made with unix systems in mind, so it eases a lot of getting things to work. If you don't want to pay for a mac, getting some linux laptop would be the next best route if you're comfortable with using linux (it's not for everyone). Of course getting a cheaper windows laptop is also fine, you're probably just going to go through more hassle to get stuff to work.
-
I don't think there's a reason for you to not apply to UW, you have a shot. You don't need to take the math gre if you don't think you'll do well on it, it won't hurt you if you haven't taken it (but doing very well on it, like 75%+, would probably help). If you really want to go to UW you should also apply to the biostats program since the two departments are well connected/ you can work with profs in either department while in either program.
-
@rosebud123 Yeah just go through the last 5 or so years here: http://www.biostat.jhsph.edu/people/alumni/alumphd.shtml
-
@StatHopeful Some of your ties are off for biostats. Here's what I got for the full lists. For reference here were the last set of rankings https://forum.thegradcafe.com/topic/52537-2014-usnwr-rankings-statisticsbiostatistics/.
Stat
1. Stanford
2. Berkeley
3. Harvard, Chicago
5. CMU, Washington
7. Duke, Michigan, Penn
10. Columbia, NCSU, Wisconsin
13. UNC
14. Cornell, Iowa State, Penn State, Texas A&M
18. Minnesota
19. Purdue
20. Hopkins, UC Davis, UCLA, Yale
24. Ohio State, Illinois Urbana-Champaign
26. Rutgers, Florida, Iowa
29. Rice
30. Colorado State, Florida State, Connecticut
33. Michigan State, UC Irvine, UT Austin
36. Northwestern, Pitt
38. George Washington, NYU, Georgia, Missouri, VTech
43. UC Santa Barbara
44. Indiana, Southern Methodist, UMBC, Virginia
48. Oregon State, UC Riverside, Massachusetts Amherst, South Carolina
52. Arizona State, Case Western, Temple
55. Baylor, George Mason, Kansas State, Colorado Denver
59. Kentucky, VCU
61. San Diego State
62. UNC Charlotte, UT San AntonioBiostat
1. Harvard, Hopkins, Washington
4. UNC
5. Michigan
6. Berkeley
7. Minnesota, Wisconsin
9. Columbia, UCLA, UT MD Anderson
12. Penn, Yale
14. Emory
15. Brown, Duke, Vanderbilt
18. BU, UC Davis
20. Florida, Iowa, Rochester, UT Houston
24. Medical College of Wisconsin
25. Illinois Chicago
26. Case Western
27. Colorado Denver
28. Massachusetts Amherst
29. South Carolina, SUNY Buffalo
31. Kansas, Alabama
33. SUNY Albany, Cincinnati, VCU
Not ranked from last time: Pitt, Medical College of South CarolinaIn stats it doesn't look like there are a lot of big changes besides Michigan moving to 7, Columbia moving to 10, and Texas A&M moving to 14. In biostats, once again, not that many big changes besides Hopkins moving to being tied for 1 (which makes sense considering how good their placements have been lately) and Penn moving to 12. For both stats and biostats there were a lot of new programs being ranked.
- Cal1gula, speowi, GoPackGo89 and 2 others
-
5
-
When people talk about programs being applied/theoretical they're usually talking about one of two things: coursework/quals or the research being done by professors in the program. I'm guessing when most people say Harvard is more applied they're talking about the coursework/quals. Harvard is a lot lighter, in this regard, than other top biostat programs where measure theory/more theoretical coursework is required (e.g. UW, Hopkins, UNC). However, that doesn't mean there aren't professors there doing theoretical research (off the top of my head there are a few bayesians who do pretty theoretical work there), just like the programs with more theoretical coursework/quals have professors who do applied work.
-
Echoing what the others said, you have a shot at every biostats program. Also, if you're interested, you also have a shot at every stats program considering your math background and math gre score (80% is really good for stats programs). So apply to wherever you want to go!
-
I think there might've been a topic or two in the past asking this question, so it might be worth looking back through the forum for some older perspectives. I was in a similar situation last year and, for me, visiting the programs, talking to current students/professors, and interacting with other accepted students who are going to be your future cohort were the most important parts of the decision process. UW and CMU are both top schools that have good placement records, with professors working in all of your areas of interest, so you really can't go wrong choosing either.
-
It seems like you already have a good general list at this point. I don't know if you have some substantial research interests at this point, but if you do I'd recommend munging around department websites to see which schools have people working in that area. This would probably be the best way for you at this point to add/remove from your list.
-
Looks like you have a pretty reasonable list (for phd programs) given your profile. You'd probably have a good shot at most masters program across the board, you can either look into program websites individually or look back through old posts on this forum to see which masters programs give funding (there won't be a lot).
-
Jesus christ, 88% isn't mediocre for stats, even for internationals (Stanford's average is 82% and they're the only program that requires it). Definitely submit it wherever you apply. No biostat programs really even asks for it, so you'll be way ahead of the pack there.
-
Given you have pretty much a 4.0 from a top 5 undergrad, your math gre is only really gonna matter at Stanford, so I wouldn't worry about it. Also I'd say to not really worry about the GRE, you just need to score above the 90th percentile in the quant section, which I'm guessing isn't going to be hard for someone with your background (most schools don't care about the other sections as long as you don't really bomb them). Lack of letter writers being able to say you can do good research shouldn't be much of a problem since most applicants don't have a ton of research in general. Also as you can see from the stickied post in this subforum, the sop doesn't really matter a whole lot.
You have a good shot at pretty much any stats program, so I'd say apply to where you want to go, and if you're really worried about getting shut out everywhere throw in a few larger programs (like Wisconsin, Michigan, Texas A&M, NC State, Penn State, Minnesota, Purdue, etc.). Since you don't have a whole lot of time left, just prioritize making sure you finish all of your apps on time, and making sure all of your letter writers know when they have to submit letters by.
-
I would post on http://www.mathematicsgre.com/ since the people who post there are more in tune with math programs. But also like Kevin said some schools only allow one app, and Stanford/Berkeley/other top 10 math programs are going to be much more of a crapshoot than their stats programs, so be wise about how you spread your apps!
-
@Radon-Nikodym No you're right, I didn't remember correctly! And you might be right that the Math GRE could be more important for you since you're interested in probability theory, but I also think that coming from Chicago and doing pretty well in the math classes there already shows you're capable. My guess is that your score is good enough that it won't make or break your chances at any top schools considering it's in line with the rest of your app. See this post from cyberwulf https://forum.thegradcafe.com/topic/89814-2017-applicant-profiles-and-admission-results-for-statisticsbiostatistics/?tab=comments#comment-1058493642
-
Chicago definitely has a reputation for grade deflation/ the math major is notoriously tough so I wouldn't worry too much about your grades (you can't change them at this point anyway). Your GRE should be competitive for top programs since you're a domestic student (the only place that requires it is Stanford, and their average is 75% and that includes internationals who are held to a higher standard), your departmental advisor probably is talking about applying to math programs or they're out of touch with current statistics phd admissions. There were at least three Chicago undergrads accepted to the stats program this last year so it seems they're ok with accepting undergrads/ that shouldn't hurt you there.
Overall I'd say apply to the schools on your list and also throw in some of the bigger state schools in the top 20, you'll definitely get in somewhere.
-
37 minutes ago, statbiostat2017 said:
With your profile you will be in the discussion EVERYWHERE. I can't wait to be the one reviewing applications one day to know for sure but for now I hypothesize there are less than 50 applicants with your kind of profile
Op definitely has a strong profile, especially with multiple papers in the works and summer research at a top 15 biostats program, so they should apply to everywhere they want to. Just would caution about being overly optimistic for UW/Harvard (not sure about Hopkins), even though that already kind of goes without saying since grad admissions are super competitive. At the visit days for both, nearly everyone was either from a top 20 undergrad, a flagship state school, or a top liberal arts college. There were a few from colleges that didn't fit into that mold, but they were definitely the minority (I would consider myself in the minority even though I went to a top 35 undergrad). Then again, this might've just been this years applicant pool, so idk if this is typical or not.
Also to the op, if you're interested in neuroimaging why not apply to Penn biostats (http://www.med.upenn.edu/pennsive/)?
-
Have you tried talking to some people in your department/ in the stats department at your school? I wouldn't think it'd be that hard to work with a prof in your stats department even if the two departments aren't super well connected (I'm guessing there have been students in the past at your program who've been in a similar situation). It doesn't seem like your reason for transferring is super compelling given that you can find a ton of graduates from biostats programs going to non bio/public health/medicine related positions post grad, and plenty of stats professors that have phds in biostats (and there are professors at all of the top 3 biostats departments working on ML/high dimensional stats/other traditional and theoretical stats problems).
-
In order to roughly give you an idea of where you're competitive, you'd need to provide a profile. However this won't be of much help as you've only completed your freshman year (and since you said it was rough I'm guessing your grades weren't the highest). From looking at the schools you want to apply to in the future, it looks like you're applying mostly based on brand name/undergrad prestige, and not based on research interests. Those schools are usually arbitrarily more competitive because of people just applying to them for their name. In terms of what safety and match schools are, they're not very well defined for phd programs, as admissions can be a crapshoot (unless you have an amazing profile). Usually "safety"/"match" schools are those that accept a large number of students (mostly large state school programs)/ some of the lower ranked schools, and "reach" schools are schools that accept a smaller number of students (brand name schools)/higher ranked schools.
My advice would be to forget about choosing which schools you're applying to until the spring/summer before your senior year. You'll probably have a better idea of your research interests, and your profile will be a good indication at that point of where you should apply.
-
I don't think any schools will fly you out pre-admisison unless they do on site interviews (e.g. Duke stats, a few biostats schools). However, most schools will pay to fly you out if you're admitted (all of the programs I was accepted to offered to fly me out). There might be a few exceptions (maybe some schools don't have as much funding for recruitment as others), but I would definitely not try to purchase any flights till you're accepted/the schools tell you about their accepted students days. If you're worried about being able to buy the flights before being reimbursed, some schools can book your flights through their travel agencies.
-
No, an A- won't hurt your chance for a masters program (or PhD program) given A's in all of your other math classes
-
Undergrad Institution: Top 35 US Undergrad
Major(s): Math, Computer Science
Minor(s):
GPA: 3.94Type of Student: Domestic white male
GRE Revised General Test:
Q: 167 (93%)
V: 163 (92%)
W: 4.0 (59%)
GRE Subject Test in Mathematics:
M: Didn't take
Programs Applying: Statistics/Biostatistics PhDResearch Experience: One summer of SIBS, one REU in biostatistics
Awards/Honors/Recognitions: Pi Mu Epsilon, Awards for being in top 5% of class
Pertinent Activities or Jobs: Math Grader, Computer Science TA since sophomore yearLetters of Recommendation: Should've been good
Any Miscellaneous Points that Might Help: Nothing that really sticks out
Applying to Where:
Berkeley - Statistics Reject 3/7
Chicago - Statistics Accepted 1/24
Washington - Statistics Waitlisted 1/18
CMU - Statistics, Joint Statistics+ML Reject 2/23
Duke - Statistics Reject 2/3
Wisconsin - Statistics Accepted 2/24
Michigan - Statistics Reject 3/14
Columbia - Statistics Reject 3/8
Cornell - Statistics Reject 4/13
Yale - Statistics Interview request 1/27, Reject 2/21
UT-Austin - Statistics Reject 3/21
Washington - Biostatistics Accepted 1/6
Harvard - Biostatistics Interview invitation 1/6, Waitlisted 2/3
UNC-Chapel Hill - Biostatistics Accepted 1/3
Penn - Biostatistics Interview invitation 12/20, Accepted 2/15
Princeton - Operations Research Reject 2/10
Chicago - Computer Science Accepted 2/23If anyone wants to see more details about my background, look back through my posts. Overall very happy with my acceptances. Also it's of note that I didn't take the math gre and got into one program that recommends it (Chicago) and got waitlisted at another that recommends it (Washington), so the advice on this forum from the past that you don't need to submit a math gre to get into programs that recommend it seems to be true. -
19 minutes ago, flabbergasted said:
Well, I'll be a little vague so that I can't be identified, but I went to a top 5 undergrad university (if you believe the US News rankings... Hint: It's the one that doesn't have a dedicated Statistics department). I had a good GPA, not exceptional (greater than 3.7) and majored in Math (hence why I'm more into the probability theory type stuff). I was really planning on applying to Math Ph.D. programs, but someone convinced me that Stats Ph.D. programs would be less competitive and that I would still be able to focus on the type of research that I'm interested in at a Stats program.
As for GRE, I got 170 quantitative, and >90th percentile the rest. I also took the Math subject test (required for Stanford) and got around 800 (80th percentile). That test was a lot more difficult than I thought it would be... My score is actually below the average subject test score listed for Stanford's Ph.D. program! That's part of why I was so surprised when I got my acceptance.
Other than that, I don't know whether I did anything that would really make me stand out. I worked as a research assistant, did two Math REUs over the summers... the typical stuff that a Math major interested in graduate school should have. My recommendation writers were mostly math professors who I took a few classes from, but they didn't know me too well. I did have two graduate math courses that I didn't completely bomb, if that helps.
You have a >3.7 gpa from one of the best schools in the country (that's known for grade deflation), a perfect gre quant score, 80th percentile on the math gre (Stanford's listed average is probably skewed by internationals so your score is probably above average for domestic students), two summers of REUs and additional research, and you've taken graduate classes. I'm not sure if you're judging yourself as not having an amazing profile because you're comparing yourself to other math majors who're applying to math phd programs, but for statistics your profile is about as good as it gets! And you probably would've fared well applying to math phd programs too from the looks of it. I don't have any real input since both programs are great and there really isn't a wrong choice for you. If there's nothing related to specific research interests that draws you more to one school than the other, my suggestion would be to choose the program you think you'd be happier at socially/ outside of the classroom (e.g. do you like berkeley or palo alto more, is the stipend significantly better at one school, were the other perspective students at one school more fun to be around, etc).
Cohort Size due to Covid
in Mathematics and Statistics
Posted · Edited by marmle
spelling
Just wanted to come here to say that you might not want to go around saying that spending $100 for each school you apply to isn't a big deal! Individuals from lower socioeconomic backgrounds are not well represented in statistics and biostatistics, and this sort of mentality doesn't help. See e.g. this twitter thread.
To actually comment on the original question in this post, my department is accepting the same number of people as in previous years.