It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

- All Categories 2.2K
- Applied Category Theory Course 355
- Applied Category Theory Seminar 4
- Exercises 149
- Discussion Groups 49
- How to Use MathJax 15
- Chat 480
- Azimuth Code Project 108
- News and Information 145
- Azimuth Blog 149
- Azimuth Forum 29
- Azimuth Project 189
- - Strategy 108
- - Conventions and Policies 21
- - Questions 43
- Azimuth Wiki 711
- - Latest Changes 701
- - - Action 14
- - - Biodiversity 8
- - - Books 2
- - - Carbon 9
- - - Computational methods 38
- - - Climate 53
- - - Earth science 23
- - - Ecology 43
- - - Energy 29
- - - Experiments 30
- - - Geoengineering 0
- - - Mathematical methods 69
- - - Meta 9
- - - Methodology 16
- - - Natural resources 7
- - - Oceans 4
- - - Organizations 34
- - - People 6
- - - Publishing 4
- - - Reports 3
- - - Software 21
- - - Statistical methods 2
- - - Sustainability 4
- - - Things to do 2
- - - Visualisation 1
- General 39

Options

## Comments

Hi, Jacob! There's bound to be interesting connections between statistics and category theory, because both disciplines are very general and conceptual. But discovering them will require a good knowledge of both fields. I'll give you a couple of references.

`Hi, Jacob! There's bound to be interesting connections between statistics and category theory, because both disciplines are very general and conceptual. But discovering them will require a good knowledge of both fields. I'll give you a couple of references.`

Here's something worth reading:

The Annals of Statistics30(2002), 1225-1310.It's an interesting paper that introduces category theory to formalize the general concept of "statistical model", followed by discussions including a very interesting one that starts on page 1279, by Hans Brøns, who writes:

He then critiques and tries to improve McCullagh’s use of category theory. I don't know how much progress has been made since then, but it seems worthwhile to pursue this further.

`Here's something worth reading: * Peter McCullagh, [What is a statistical model?](https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.aos/1035844977), _The Annals of Statistics_ **30** (2002), 1225-1310. It's an interesting paper that introduces category theory to formalize the general concept of "statistical model", followed by discussions including a very interesting one that starts on page 1279, by Hans Brøns, who writes: > Peter McCullagh’s paper is exciting, because it can be seen as the start of a new, long overdue discussion of the mathematical foundation of the theory of statistics. He rightly points out that only part of the thinking in theoretical statistics is formalized mathematically and tries to extend the existing theory of statistical modelling using modern abstract mathematical tools. This is a great philosophical challenge, but it is a formidable pedagogical task to communicate the results to the statisticians. > The paper contains beyond the abstract definition of the new extended concept of a statistical model a treasure trove of examples and counterexamples, but I shall concentrate on an analysis of the definition of models. McCullagh’s idea is that parameter spaces and sample spaces which are usually treated as sets or measure spaces in applications have a richer structure defining what one could be tempted to call their “physical nature,” which should be reflected in the models and in the choice of transformations between them. This is done by giving them an inner structure, symmetry for example, and by considering each model as a unit in a greater universe of models. **To give this a mathematical expression, the much loved and much hated theory of categories is used.** He then critiques and tries to improve McCullagh’s use of category theory. I don't know how much progress has been made since then, but it seems worthwhile to pursue this further.`

Hi John, Thanks for that reference! This is exactly the sort of ideas I'm interested in pursuing. At the moment my level of understanding of category theory is to patchy to be able to really get a good grasp of what McCullagh is doing, but I'm really exited that this course can help me. Huge thanks for doing this!

`Hi John, Thanks for that reference! This is exactly the sort of ideas I'm interested in pursuing. At the moment my level of understanding of category theory is to patchy to be able to really get a good grasp of what McCullagh is doing, but I'm really exited that this course can help me. Huge thanks for doing this!`