Fake Banner
Travel With Two Infants

The other day I traveled with Kalliopi and our two newborns to Padova from Lulea. After six full...

A Nice Little Combination

Although I have long retired from serious chess tournaments (they take too much time, a luxury...

The Strange Case Of The Monotonous Running Average

These days I am putting the finishing touches on a hybrid algorithm that optimizes a system (a...

Turning 60

Strange how time goes by. And strange I would say that, since I know time does not flow, it is...

User picture.
picture for Hank Campbellpicture for Patrick Lockerbypicture for Heidi Hendersonpicture for Bente Lilja Byepicture for Sascha Vongehrpicture for Johannes Koelman
Tommaso DorigoRSS Feed of this column.

Tommaso Dorigo is an experimental particle physicist, who works for the INFN at the University of Padova, and collaborates with the CMS and the SWGO experiments. He is the president of the Read More »

Blogroll
...and people who like sausages, should not ask how they are made.

As a member of two large scientific collaborations (CDF and CMS), I enjoy the benefit of seeing lots of scientific publications that carry my name as an author being produced at weekly rates. This is however also a burden, since I at the very least must try to ensure that I like the way the results are produced. I.e., that I agree with the details of how these scientific measurements are made.
Elsevier is spamming my mailbox. You would not expect that from a large publishing company who makes money from publishing scientific papers, but that's what happens. I think I am not alone in receiving automated emails with your name on the subject (a typical sign that the message is junk by the way):

Dr. Dorigo, your work has been cited.

Dear Dr. T. Dorigo,

It is our pleasure to inform you that your publication has been cited in a journal published by Elsevier.
Through my colleague Marco Cirelli I got to know about the effort of 36 high-school student of Charlottesville (VA), who are fund-raising for a trip to CERN this spring. I thus visited their home page, and got favourably impressed with the organization of their campaign, which betrays their strong collective interest in the trip.
Update: I have modified the title of this post [originally: "Opera's Statistical Booboo"] and the text below (in places I marked accordingly) upon realizing, thanks to a very good point raised by a reader in the comments thread below, that the idealization I was making of the measurement described below made my conclusions too hasty. Read the text to the end if you want more detail.
A blog is by nature a place where things move on fast. Articles disappear beyond the horizon in the matter of a week or two, and only rarely get resuscitated by a later article linking them back from oblivion.

At Science 2.0 things are no better than in any other blog sites, with the aggravating feature that there is no "archive" button, nor a "random post" feature. Since I believe that many of my articles are not very connected to the specific time at which they have been written, I have in mind to reorganize the material somehow, when I have the time. However, this looks like a grievious task, since the number of posts I have written here is about 500.
"Exact coverage, like the Grail of legend, if approached by any but a perfectly
pure and holy frequentist, is borne away and vanishes from sight.
"

Joel Heinrich, CDF internal Note 6438