PhysicsKid

I’m no expert but you look like a very very competitive applicant for top top departments. If you are interested in optimization, Stat ML, and signal processing I am surprised that Stanford isn’t on your Statistics list just considering some of the top people in the world in those fields are here. If you were just not considering Stanford et al for competitiveness reasons I would say you should set your sights higher because your application looks very good!

Your quant score is perfect (which is to say, better than “ok-ish!”). I would be absolutely shocked if any program rejects you or even judges you at all for a less than stellar writing score. From talking to Profs on various (T5) admissions committees, it seems like they appreciate the GRE just because it gives some sort of way to at least filter out a few people (very low quant scores are predictive of lack of success, even if the rest is not predictive at all). They basically will see if you got above 165 (or similar, depending on school obviously) on quant and then not look at the GRE again.

I would say it could be worth applying to the PhD programs that let you transfer your application to the masters program. If you don’t get into programs that you want to and think that a large part of it was lack of math (was an issue for me the first time i applied) could be good to do a masters (if financially possible/you can get a TA or RA job) and get more math and possibly more applicable references.

As someone coming from a (very) similar background as you, I would say that physics majors are well sought after in Stats admissions. Doing well in physics undergrad and then showing good pure math chops (as a good grade in real analysis would do) is good as a way to differentiate yourself from other applicants. Another thing to note is that working for a couple years is generally viewed favorably as well. Obviously depends if there was some statistical flavor to the work you were doing, but most places like the additional perspective you can offer having done work and decided to return to academia. I would definitely apply to PhD programs if you think that you definitely want to do academia as even if you don't get in, you can ask for your application to be transferred to the masters program. Good luck!

This also seems like a good thing to ask students during visit days!

Hi! Sorry for the confusion. I applied to Masters programs in 2021 and PhDs this cycle. I got my Wharton Statistics PhD decision in mid-February and it seems based on the results section of theGradCafe that other decisions were sent out around then as well. I can also confirm that some Columbia Stats PhD decisions came out today.

I'm also a domestic student and I received by decision in mid February. Not sure about others. I got the invitation to visit day and then checked my spam folder and found the admit email there. Maybe the same for you! If so, congratulations!

I would definitely second what Ryuk said. A vast vast majority of students have no safety issues at UChicago and, especially as a graduate student, you have a choice in terms of where to live. I have many friends who are in PhDs at UChicago and they love living in the South Loop area. There is a UChicago shuttle between them and campus (in addition to Merta and the Red Line) and the south loop area is very safe. Largely I would say that if you feel you would be happier at UChicago, you should go to UChicago.

It maybe a reporting bias or the people who received interviews are mostly international (i.e. those who are not currently in the states and who are less likely to use gradcafe. Stat depts mostly interview the international applicants as I have heard) While this is true, Columbia historically has interviewed many people by now, many of whom were in the States. The paucity of interviews seems unusual given how late it is in the season. My Columbia interview two years ago was on the 12th of February and there had already been some interviews logged in GradCafe at that point. Not sure if they are phasing out the interviews or if the process is just taking longer.

My understanding from past people who have gotten into UWash is that not all accepted are interviewed (for Statistics, not sure about Biostat), might have changed since they got in though (was a couple years ago).

Hey everyone! I am about to start a Masters in Statistics at Stanford where there is a fair amount of freedom in terms of what courses to take. I really want to get a PhD in Statistics after my Masters, but took very little Pure Math in Undergrad. I had done lots of Physics and Chemistry, but I think that the lack of Real Analysis on my transcript made it difficult for PhD applications. I really really want to challenge myself and was thinking of trying to take the courses for the intro PhD sequence but I heard on this forum in other places that some places actually view having already taken intro PhD classes as a bad thing for PhD admissions (to my dismay!). My profile in general is a bit weird though so I guess I am just wondering what would look best on a transcript in terms of coursework. I am actively looking to join a more statistics oriented research group after mostly doing research in Physics in Undergrad. Student Type: Domestic Asian/White Male Undergrad: Mid-tier Ivy Major: Physics GPA: 3.84 Undergrad: Honors Calculus (A), Partial Differential Equations (A), Probability (A), Accelerated Intro to Comp. Sci (B), Graduate Statistical Mechanics (Chemistry) (A), Graduate Statistical Mechanics (Physics) (A), Graduate Quantum Mechanics A & B (As), Graduate Solid State Chemistry (A), Graduate Biological Physics (A) GRE: 170 Q/ 170 V/ 5.0 W Research: 3 years of research in Computational Physics and Chemistry labs, no publications but lots of experience applying various ML algorithms with Tensorflow Other Experience: MITx Statistics (A, but online so I get that it is kinda jank but this was a really rigorous and mathematical intro to Statistics), MITx Data Analysis in R (A, also a great course but was also online), work experience at an AI Cybersecurity firm I want to go to a very good PhD program in Statistics after my Masters and I had a couple interviews with PhD programs this year (Columbia among others) but didn't get accepted I believe partly because of my lack of real analysis on my transcript. Should I just take fun courses for the required Statistics Courses and not do the intro PhD sequence, make sure I take as much Math and CS as possible and then hopefully find a research position in some statistics or statistics adjacent lab? In terms of the math i should take, would it be weird if I still didn't take their undergrad Honors Real Analysis I class and instead tried to take Lebesgue integration and Fourier analysis (basically their Real Analysis II). Would it make sense to take Math classes other than real analysis? Sorry for all the questions! I really would appreciate any input!

Hi Kingduck, the quarter system is a bit confusing since it counts the Summer Quarter. Really 6 quarters would be the same as 4 semesters since two semesters typically cover the Autumn, Winter, and Spring quarters. In terms of the Stanford vs Berkeley Masters programs it would seem that Stanford's is more geared toward future PhDs than Berkeley's, but I definitely would agree it seems tough to assume anything about possible research work at either school.

From my understanding, UChicago PhD explicitly says that they send out in batches and this is backed up historically. Seems like once they start, they send out new batches once a week. Based on this reasoning, another round should be coming Sunday/Monday.

Hi all, thanks for the thoughtful responses! I guess the main impetus for my question was actually what @Stat Assistant Professor said in “Domestic Students Disadvantage“ which was that some highly ranked programs have very large, not necessarily great, Masters programs (cough Columbia cough) while some lower ranked programs have smaller competitive programs that are more akin to unfunded first and second years of PhD programs. I was trying to get a sense of whether there was any sort of consensus on which programs are best as preparation for a PhD? Would a one year program in the UK be better than one in the US? Is Stanford’s program more of an industry focused one or do people go from MSc to PhD there? There is precious little information online about many of these programs (even in terms of things as simple as size) so any information would be greatly appreciated.

Hi everyone, I hope you are all doing well during this stressful time of year. I was just wondering if there exists any type of thinking in terms of what the best masters programs in statistics are? I feel like it is even more difficult to rank Masters programs than PhD ones simply because of the variability in whether a Masters program is viewed as a kind of cash cow, a stepping stone to a higher degree, or a primarily professional degree. Personally, I would love to get some of your insights as to what the tiers of Masters programs are for someone who wants to get a PhD in Statistics, but I am certain that there are other people struggling with what to think of various masters programs and how to properly compare them. I truly don't have any sort of insight into the matter, despite my constant attempts at googling; so, any insight would be greatly appreciated! A few example Masters Programs that I have no idea how to "order": Oxford MSc Statistical Science, LSE MSc in Statistics (Research), Yale MSc Statistics and Data Science/Yale MA Statistics, University of Washington MSc Statistics - Advanced Methods and Data Analysis, Stanford MSc Statistics, Berkeley MSc Statistics, Columbia MSc Statistics, Chicago MSc Statistics Thank you so much!

Hi @Stat Assistant Professor, is it still true that most MS programs in Stat admit most people at minimum program requirements? I heard that Yale's program, for example, got over 1000 applications and only admitted something like 40 people. And Yale's department isn't that highly ranked. Is there something different about their masters program vs others?

I already graduated and received this email so I’m assuming it was just an automated email sent to all applicants.