Princeton取消associate prof这个级别了 - 未名空间MITBBS历史存档

Princeton取消associate prof这个级别了# Economics - 经济

e*o2009-01-15 08:01

1 楼

【以下文字转载自 SanFrancisco 讨论区】
发信人: elmo (elmo), 信区: SanFrancisco
标题: What's the meaning of
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Jul 10 21:32:16 2008)
"I don't have the luxury of doing sth"?

z*c2009-01-15 08:01

2 楼

好几个直接从assistant称为prof
主页上都找不到一个associate prof的人
是怎么回事？

o*e2009-01-15 08:01

3 楼

没功夫干。。。

【在 e**o 的大作中提到】

: 【以下文字转载自 SanFrancisco 讨论区】
: 发信人: elmo (elmo), 信区: SanFrancisco
: 标题: What's the meaning of
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Jul 10 21:32:16 2008)
: "I don't have the luxury of doing sth"?

l*n2009-01-15 08:01

4 楼

汗。。。
wei xiong是因为其他系要挖，所以直升了。其他人不知道。

O*e2009-01-15 08:01

5 楼

It means that you are constrained by circumstance, whatever they may be
(no time, no money, other responsibilities with higher priority), not to
be able to do something that you would like to do.

【在 e**o 的大作中提到】

: 【以下文字转载自 SanFrancisco 讨论区】
: 发信人: elmo (elmo), 信区: SanFrancisco
: 标题: What's the meaning of
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Jul 10 21:32:16 2008)
: "I don't have the luxury of doing sth"?

g*y2009-01-15 08:01

6 楼

Rossi-Hansberg 这样的不直升也难吧。

z*c2009-01-15 08:01

7 楼

xiong wei的东西还好，抛开一些技术性的东西，文章的idea和model都好理解，
也就是说告诉你idea，你自己也能把model做出来，所以难是难在idea上。
但另外一位老兄就不同了，他刚出道的时候两篇文章我都是一看就明白，后来
连续出了四五篇影响极大的文章，都是idea一说就明白（当然也都是全新的），
但他做的model都是非常复杂，打死我也想不出来，所以学到新东西的同时也
比较沮丧。
让我感慨的是，他研究的这些经典问题之前做的几个人（nobel级人物）的
model都是非常简单漂亮的。这也是我喜欢的路子。（说个有意思的个人经历，
我一年级的时候读了很多复杂的模型，基本是读一半就扔掉，二年级的时候上
一个中国教授的课，他讲的全是简单得不能再简单的模型，那个时候我还挺傻，
觉得他没水平，后来读别人的文章彻底喜欢上这个路子，再看这个中国教师的
note才觉得十分宝贵，可惜晚了，没做他那个领域。我现在是觉得系里让一年
级的学生读复杂的文章不是一个很好的训练模式，其实几个top系的训练路子
是差别很大的，有的强调数学严密，有的强调idea新颖）
就我所熟悉的几个领域的顶尖的学者来说

【在 l******n 的大作中提到】

: 汗。。。
: wei xiong是因为其他系要挖，所以直升了。其他人不知道。

m*y2009-01-15 08:01

8 楼

哈哈，这个帖子写得很好啊。

【在 z***c 的大作中提到】

: xiong wei的东西还好，抛开一些技术性的东西，文章的idea和model都好理解，
: 也就是说告诉你idea，你自己也能把model做出来，所以难是难在idea上。
: 但另外一位老兄就不同了，他刚出道的时候两篇文章我都是一看就明白，后来
: 连续出了四五篇影响极大的文章，都是idea一说就明白（当然也都是全新的），
: 但他做的model都是非常复杂，打死我也想不出来，所以学到新东西的同时也
: 比较沮丧。
: 让我感慨的是，他研究的这些经典问题之前做的几个人（nobel级人物）的
: model都是非常简单漂亮的。这也是我喜欢的路子。（说个有意思的个人经历，
: 我一年级的时候读了很多复杂的模型，基本是读一半就扔掉，二年级的时候上
: 一个中国教授的课，他讲的全是简单得不能再简单的模型，那个时候我还挺傻，

q*i2009-01-15 08:01

9 楼

我就是经常在想，是不是很多人做model就是唯恐不够复杂让别人都看懂了..........

m*52009-01-15 08:01

10 楼

不复杂不凸显自己聪明深邃啊

【在 q****i 的大作中提到】

: 我就是经常在想，是不是很多人做model就是唯恐不够复杂让别人都看懂了..........

g*y2009-01-15 08:01

11 楼

其实写简单有效的model要比复杂的难得多吧。

z*c2009-01-15 08:01

12 楼

不同意，这绝对是误解。

【在 g****y 的大作中提到】

: 其实写简单有效的model要比复杂的难得多吧。

e*t2009-01-15 08:01

13 楼

What do you mean by "复杂"? Mind to give an example?
However, I don't believe there should exist "simple" model in advanced
research.
Have you ever seen any "simple" proof in nowaday mathematics, "simple"
algorithm in CS, or "simple" idea/model in physics? But actually, it seems
to
me that more people in economics are obsessed with "simple but beautiful
idea"..

【在 z***c 的大作中提到】

: xiong wei的东西还好，抛开一些技术性的东西，文章的idea和model都好理解，
: 也就是说告诉你idea，你自己也能把model做出来，所以难是难在idea上。
: 但另外一位老兄就不同了，他刚出道的时候两篇文章我都是一看就明白，后来
: 连续出了四五篇影响极大的文章，都是idea一说就明白（当然也都是全新的），
: 但他做的model都是非常复杂，打死我也想不出来，所以学到新东西的同时也
: 比较沮丧。
: 让我感慨的是，他研究的这些经典问题之前做的几个人（nobel级人物）的
: model都是非常简单漂亮的。这也是我喜欢的路子。（说个有意思的个人经历，
: 我一年级的时候读了很多复杂的模型，基本是读一半就扔掉，二年级的时候上
: 一个中国教授的课，他讲的全是简单得不能再简单的模型，那个时候我还挺傻，

z*c2009-01-15 08:01

14 楼

read Krugman, Shleifer，Tirole, Holmstrom, Diamond&Dybvigs, Morris&Shin, to
name a few, you will see how simple a model could be.
A good thing of economics is in many subfields, it has developed to an
extent
that only 2-3 models in that subfield are the workhorses, so most published
papers are just extensions. These might not be simple, but definitely
not “complex”in my definition.
By complex, I mean the idea is brand new, model's structure is brand new,
the solution often involves some very smar

【在 e***t 的大作中提到】

: What do you mean by "复杂"? Mind to give an example?
: However, I don't believe there should exist "simple" model in advanced
: research.
: Have you ever seen any "simple" proof in nowaday mathematics, "simple"
: algorithm in CS, or "simple" idea/model in physics? But actually, it seems
: to
: me that more people in economics are obsessed with "simple but beautiful
: idea"..

z*c2009-01-15 08:01

15 楼

Let me give an example.
Herding behavioral is longly believed to be irrational. But if you read
Bikhchandani, Hirshleifer and Welch (1992) you will see it is indeed
rational. The idea is beatiful and model is unbelievably simple.
The following research has such a timeline:
1. Application of their idea in many settings
2. Relaxing a key assumption in two different ways, herding disappear.
3. Try to add some new feature, the herding re-appear.
In 3, a paper by Avery and Zemsky just add another lay

【在 e***t 的大作中提到】

: What do you mean by "复杂"? Mind to give an example?
: However, I don't believe there should exist "simple" model in advanced
: research.
: Have you ever seen any "simple" proof in nowaday mathematics, "simple"
: algorithm in CS, or "simple" idea/model in physics? But actually, it seems
: to
: me that more people in economics are obsessed with "simple but beautiful
: idea"..

e*t2009-01-15 08:01

16 楼

Basically you were not answering my question...
So you want to say all the papers under these names are simple? Or all of
them are "complex" in your opinion? And how can "brand new" has anything
to do with "complex"? If A is more complex than B, that's it. It doesn't
matter whether A is newer or older than B. And could you put it in a
mathematical way to explain what you mean by "mathematically complex"?
What about an example, not many, for one of "some very smart tricks"?
Just curious.

to
publ

【在 z***c 的大作中提到】

: read Krugman, Shleifer，Tirole, Holmstrom, Diamond&Dybvigs, Morris&Shin, to
: name a few, you will see how simple a model could be.
: A good thing of economics is in many subfields, it has developed to an
: extent
: that only 2-3 models in that subfield are the workhorses, so most published
: papers are just extensions. These might not be simple, but definitely
: not “complex”in my definition.
: By complex, I mean the idea is brand new, model's structure is brand new,
: the solution often involves some very smar

e*t2009-01-15 08:01

17 楼

Thanks. I will try it.

much.

【在 z***c 的大作中提到】

: Let me give an example.
: Herding behavioral is longly believed to be irrational. But if you read
: Bikhchandani, Hirshleifer and Welch (1992) you will see it is indeed
: rational. The idea is beatiful and model is unbelievably simple.
: The following research has such a timeline:
: 1. Application of their idea in many settings
: 2. Relaxing a key assumption in two different ways, herding disappear.
: 3. Try to add some new feature, the herding re-appear.
: In 3, a paper by Avery and Zemsky just add another lay

z*c2009-01-15 08:01

18 楼

You are right in some points (such as brand new has nothing to do with
complexity), I did not make myself clear enough.
But if you read enough, you will fully understand my previous post.
If not, no matter how I explain, you will still be confused.
To make it clear, read top journals you will often encounter some very
uncontroversially (even if you are not in that field) simple models but
the idea is fantastic. Some papers could make you very painful. Some
could make you exciting (beautiful idea

【在 e***t 的大作中提到】

: Basically you were not answering my question...
: So you want to say all the papers under these names are simple? Or all of
: them are "complex" in your opinion? And how can "brand new" has anything
: to do with "complex"? If A is more complex than B, that's it. It doesn't
: matter whether A is newer or older than B. And could you put it in a
: mathematical way to explain what you mean by "mathematically complex"?
: What about an example, not many, for one of "some very smart tricks"?
: Just curious.
:
: to

o*o2009-01-15 08:01

19 楼

把高难的问题和概念用简单有效的model表达出来才是牛逼的
玩高难数学模型的比上不足比下当然是绰绰有余

【在 g****y 的大作中提到】

: 其实写简单有效的model要比复杂的难得多吧。

M*d2009-01-15 08:01

20 楼

"另外一位老兄"是谁啊

【在 z***c 的大作中提到】

: xiong wei的东西还好，抛开一些技术性的东西，文章的idea和model都好理解，
: 也就是说告诉你idea，你自己也能把model做出来，所以难是难在idea上。
: 但另外一位老兄就不同了，他刚出道的时候两篇文章我都是一看就明白，后来
: 连续出了四五篇影响极大的文章，都是idea一说就明白（当然也都是全新的），
: 但他做的model都是非常复杂，打死我也想不出来，所以学到新东西的同时也
: 比较沮丧。
: 让我感慨的是，他研究的这些经典问题之前做的几个人（nobel级人物）的
: model都是非常简单漂亮的。这也是我喜欢的路子。（说个有意思的个人经历，
: 我一年级的时候读了很多复杂的模型，基本是读一半就扔掉，二年级的时候上
: 一个中国教授的课，他讲的全是简单得不能再简单的模型，那个时候我还挺傻，

d*n2009-01-15 08:01

21 楼

你确认xiongwei的东西告诉你idea，你能把model做出来？
我是不太sure这个

【在 z***c 的大作中提到】

: xiong wei的东西还好，抛开一些技术性的东西，文章的idea和model都好理解，
: 也就是说告诉你idea，你自己也能把model做出来，所以难是难在idea上。
: 但另外一位老兄就不同了，他刚出道的时候两篇文章我都是一看就明白，后来
: 连续出了四五篇影响极大的文章，都是idea一说就明白（当然也都是全新的），
: 但他做的model都是非常复杂，打死我也想不出来，所以学到新东西的同时也
: 比较沮丧。
: 让我感慨的是，他研究的这些经典问题之前做的几个人（nobel级人物）的
: model都是非常简单漂亮的。这也是我喜欢的路子。（说个有意思的个人经历，
: 我一年级的时候读了很多复杂的模型，基本是读一半就扔掉，二年级的时候上
: 一个中国教授的课，他讲的全是简单得不能再简单的模型，那个时候我还挺傻，