Right Now

subscribe to posts here                        

Recent Entries

  • Schoen's 'del', a very fine index if there ever was one
    published on 45th anniversary of the article (August, 1970), with month -precision....

    I've heard Andrew Noymer bring up Schoen's Δ (del) a couple times now in the context of 'good lifetable summary indicators that have been passed over, but without any obvious reason'. Usually it takes three to tip me over, but this time it was two mentions. Maybe because we're talking about demography tools. Well, it should have been one mention!

     Δ is just the geometric mean of a mortality rate schedule, and it has lots of neat properties that you can read about in the short linked article. One of them is that ratios of Δ for two populations (or sexes, or years, etc) can be interpreted in a straightforward way: if the ratio of male Δ to female Δ is 2, then male mortality rates are twice as high. This is not the case for life expectancy or the age standardized death rates. If you halve mortality rates, you don't double life expectancy, and so forth. Age standardized death rates are arbitrary due to the use of a standard (even if some standards are common practice...).

    So here are all Δ in the HMD (or their inverse, actually...), for both sexes (males blue, females red):

    Talk about divergence!!!

    If we want to study trends in divergence / convergence, and if we want to make group comparisons in mortality, there is a good argument that this is the measure we should be using. You can decompose differences in much the same way as we decompose differences in life expectancy, and so forth, partitioning the difference out to ages and causes. Just say'n.

    Here's the code:


    Posted Aug 28, 2015, 5:12 AM by Tim Riffe
  • Tic tocs up, toc ticks down, relativized, averaged
    If you haven't seen the Time Flies page yet, you ought to, it's super cool:

    That viz (can you call it a dataviz? there's no data... concept viz?) got me thinking. The basic notion is that the meaning of a year get's relativized to the amount of time you've lived. As we grow older, the proportion of our life that a given year takes up is less and less. This is all because our reference period (lived life) is growing. Anyway, it's a theoretical optimum, rather than actual perception, but it coincides with the anecdotes people have about time flying faster all the time. I googled a bit and found that plenty of people actually study the perception of time as a function of age. That's awesome.

    I then thought, if you knew how long you'd live, then you'd know how long you have left, and this could be the reference rather than years lived. Let's call this, forward-looking relativized, as opposed to backward-looking relativized. Forward-looking relativization is symmetrical to backward-looking relativization. If you knew when you were going to die, you'd have both durations to relativize to. Then what would you think? How would this change the way you make decisions? Does running out of time make you savor? Does it make you slow down and notice details? At mid life, would we switch perspectives, always referring to the shorter segment of life (the one behind or the one in front). Maybe we'd take an average? But which kind of mean? When you don't know, use the arthmetic mean! And here's how the directionally-averaged perception of a unit of time looks by years lived, years left, and lifespan (in an ATL diagram).

    You'd of course need to weight the lifelines in there, possibly using d(x) from the lifetable, or some other population weights. Plenty of imagining to do in this direction. 

    * In this case, the notions of fast and slow can easily flip, depending on what kind of mean you take ... In fact, even in the given arithmetic representation, you could swap slow and fast, and it'd still be legit. mental yoga.

    Posted Aug 21, 2015, 5:27 AM by Tim Riffe
  • HT #Lotka (1934)
    Today's quote:

    "... the question arises: would not a treatment of demographic problems that based itself on hypotheses in order to extract necessary conclusions be of doubtful practical value? We would be powerfully misled in viewing matters that way. The conditions that present themselves in an actual population are always excessively complicated. Whoever has failed to grasp clearly the necessary relations among the characteristics of a theoretical population subject to simple hypotheses, will certainly be unable to manage in the much more complicated relations that exist in a real population. If one has wavered in the attack on a simple problem, he will assuredly stumble in the face of very serious complications. It is for this reason that authors who profess little respect for the application of mathematical analysis to demographic problems are those who in their writings present us with horrible examples of the confusion that results from striving to resolve by an avalanche of words problems whose complexity imposes on us the use of the condensed language of mathematics." - A. Lotka (1934, 1939, both in French) This translation was from D. P. Smith and H. Rossert (1998)

    True then, true today. HT to VCR for sending me to this manuscript.

    *It turns out to be useful to have a large number of such retorts on hand for the kind of work I do.
    Posted Jul 29, 2015, 8:29 AM by Tim Riffe
  • mid-lab-talk summary

    I plowed through a bunch of dizzying diagrams, then repeated the exercise with these words:

    APC surface

    two dimensional hacks

    three views it gives

    three views it lacks

    A dimension of time

    of life and of death

    with cohorts defined

    by their very last breath

    topsy turvy

    realigned in a mirror

    in TPD time

    death grows nearer

    but to see variation

    within spans of life

    we need to cut time

    with a different knife

    you can squeeze out time

    or slice right through it

    the ATL plane

    is a good way to view it

    tic tocs up

    toc ticks down

    add’m together

    and lifespans abound

    a series of planes

    all stacked in a row

    gives six temporal views

    of stocks or of flows

    and as models go

    there are more and less clever

    we just need to see

    these perspectives together

    really it’s easier

    than origami

    just triangle slices

    cut like salami

    get six dimensions

    for the price of three

    it’s an aesthetic result

    between you and me

    this is not a tale

    of statistical inference

    ask and I’ll give you

    complete indifference

    but can it do tricks?

    can we make any money?

    -it tells party jokes

    but you won’t find them funny

    turns out there’s a hoax

    a crime to expose

    a detective adventure

    that I can’t solve with prose

    And then moved on to CSI Rostock: "The case of the mis-specified morbidity pattern"

    Next stop, Prague!

    Posted Jul 21, 2015, 5:58 AM by Tim Riffe
  • 6 dimensions of demographic time #demography
    This post will be woefully short. Basically, you know how with APC you buy two and get the third for free? That is, you really only have two pieces of info with APC: well, if you had three pieces of info you get SIX indices! The six indices are chronological age (A), period (P), birth cohort (C), thanatological age (T), death cohort (D), and lifespan (L). In short, you only need 3 pieces of information to build out a 3-d temporal space. For example, with 1) birth cohort, 2) lifespan, and 3) a position in time (period), then we get chrono age, death cohort and thano age for free! Who doesn't like free things?! This is an ongoing project of mine to build out a 3-d Lexis-like space. The projection you see in this WebGL object follows the right-angles that are all around in demography, whereas an isotropic (time proportions are same in all directions) version of the same space ends up being a tetrahedral-octahedral honeycomb (say what?!). This beast of a diagram was done using the rgl package in R, which lets you save to WebGL, which lets me save the thing so you can see it in a browser. But if you come hang out then we can make one out of Zometool

    This is a still-shot. Just click the image to go to the interactive (twirly) one, or visit: http://demog.berkeley.edu/~triffe/RGL1/

    I'm excited to present this (and a proper buildup to it) at a lab talk next week for the Population and Health Lab at the MPIDR. I'm also excited to present it at the upcoming EAPS "Changing patterns of mortality and morbidity : age-, time-, cause- and cohort-perspectives" workshop in Prague. By then, Jonas Schöley will have been working on an interactive Shiny App to view data that permit the use of such coordinates, and Pancho Villavicencio will be helping my dot the i's and cross the t's when it comes to describing the geometry of all this. Can you say "let's calculate some new kinds of rates!"? Demography rules.

    Posted Jul 19, 2015, 11:12 AM by Tim Riffe
Showing posts 1 - 5 of 130. View more »

The inelegant old-school 1-page blog has now migrated to the 'blog' tab on the left. This page only shows the 5 most recent entries.