Visualizing Ocean Currents

This is a beautiful representation of ocean currents around the world:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/gsfc/7009056027/

Put together by the NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center Scientific Visualization Studio, this short video circles the digital globe, showing the relative strengths and directions of ocean movement.

Watching this allows one to see some of the basic mathematics of fluid flow, like tendency toward rotation and how fluid behaves at boundaries.  In addition, global phenomena like the jet stream and trade winds can also be perceived.

This dynamic representation of data is similar to this wind map in how it brings to life the ideas of vector fields and flow lines.

By patrick honner, ago

The Pineapple, the Hare, and Test Quality

An absurd reading passage from the New York State 8th-grade English exam was published in a local paper, along with the inscrutable questions that followed it.  The passage, described as “a non-sense story” by its original author, is about a talking pineapple racing a hare.

The passage is bizarre, and the questions that follow (“The animals ate the pineapple most likely because they were …”) are virtually meaningless.  You can catch up on all the details in this story from the NY Daily News.

This is yet another public embarrassment for those in charge of creating, screening, and overseeing standardized testing.  The outcry in the wake of this episode has elicited a predictable response from the NYS testing commissioner:  the associated questions will not be counted because of their “ambiguous nature”.  (Here is the official statement.)

I call this predictable because we’ve seen this type of response in the past.  When inexcusably erroneous math questions appeared on a NYS Regents exam, an embarrassing sequence of events ultimately led to removing the question because of variations in usage.  There was no real admission that an error had been made, and the test (and indeed, the question itself) were both steadfastly defended.

Such issues seem to be remarkably common.  In studying NYS Math Regents Exams, we routinely see erroneous, poorly-constructed, ambiguous, and meaningless questions, but such incidents rarely garner much attention.  What’s different here is the publicity this particular story is getting.

In this era of high-stakes testing, hopefully this incident will get more people thinking about the question, “Are these tests any good?”

By patrick honner, ago

Joe Girardi, Probability, and Expected Value

During last night’s Yankees-Twins baseball game, the commentators were discussing the Yankees’ increased use of defensive shifts.

A “shift” is a defensive realignment of the infield to guard against a particular player’s hitting tendencies.  For example, if a player is much more likely to hit the ball to the right side of the infield (as, say, a strong left-handed hitter might be), a team may move an infielder from the left side to the right side to increase the chance of defensive success.

Dramatic infield shifting was once a rarity in the game, employed against only a few hitters in the league.  It is now being used with increasing frequency.  “All the data is out there,” said the announcers when discussing Yankees’ manager Joe Girardi’s explanation of why he was using it more.  (Which sounded remarkably like what Rays’ manager Joe Maddon, a pioneer in increased defensive shifting, had to say when asked about it some time ago).

The essential idea is that, given the reams of data now recorded on player performance, teams have a much more refined understanding of what a player will do.  No longer is the projection “The player has a 30% of getting a hit”; now, it’s “The player pulls 83% of ground balls to the left side of the infield”.  Naturally, teams try to use such information to their advantage.

It’s good that Joe Girardi is demonstrating an increased appreciation for, and understanding of, probability.  But as last night’s game suggests, he may need to learn more about the principle of expected value.

Early in the game, the bases were loaded with two outs, and a left-handed batter came to the plate.  Girardi put the defensive shift on, responding to data on this player that suggested he was extremely likely to ground out to the right side of the infield.  But probability considerations should be only one part of the analysis.  By leaving so much of the left side of the infield undefended, a situation was created where a weakly hit ground ball that would usually be an easy out actually produced two runs for the Twins.

In short, although the probability of that event (ground ball to the left side) was low, the risk (giving up two runs) was high.  Considering both the probability and the payoff is essential to long-term success.

I’d be surprised if the Yankees’ employ the shift again in that situation.  And if the Yankees need a special quantitative consultant, I am available during the summer.

By patrick honner, ago
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox

Join other followers: