SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 1011.1160

A Conversation with James Hannan

Abstract

Jim Hannan is a professor who has lived an interesting life and one whose fundamental research in repeated games was not fully appreciated until late in his career. During his service as a meteorologist in the Army in World War II, Jim played poker and made weather forecasts. It is curious that his later research included strategies for repeated play that apply to selecting the best forecaster. James Hannan was born in Holyoke, Massachusetts on September 14, 1922. He attended St. Jerome's High School and in January 1943 received the Ph.B. from St. Michael's College in Colchester, Vermont. Jim enlisted in the US Army Air Force to train and serve as a meteorologist. This took him to army airbases in China by the close of the war. Following discharge from the army, Jim studied mathematics at Harvard and graduated with the M.S. in June 1947. To prepare for doctoral work in statistics at the University of North Carolina that fall, Jim went to the University of Michigan in the summer of 1947. The routine admissions' physical revealed a spot on the lung and the possibility of tuberculosis. This caused Jim to stay at Ann Arbor through the fall of 1947 and then at a Veterans Administration Hospital in Framingham, Massachusetts to have his condition followed more closely. He was discharged from the hospital in the spring and started his study at Chapel Hill in the fall of 1948. There he began research in compound decision theory under Herbert Robbins. Feeling the need for teaching experience, Jim left Chapel Hill after two years and short of thesis to take a three year appointment as an instructor at Catholic University in Washington, DC. When told that renewal was not coming, Jim felt pressure to finish his degree.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Dennis Gilliland, R. V. Ramamoorthi. 2010-11-04. A Conversation with James Hannan. https://doi.org/10.1214/09-sts283

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

The Design and Implementation of a Virtual Statistical Computing Lab to Teach R Coding to Introductory Statistics Students

Motivated by national calls for computationally enriched, data-centric instruction across the statistics curriculum, this study investigates the design, implementation, and impact of a Virtual Statistical Computing Lab (VSCL) integrated into an introductory statistics course at a medium-sized minority-serving university in the USA. The redesigned course embedded R-based coding through two virtual lab formats: Design I (a static Posit Cloud environment) and Design II (an interactive learnr-based interface). Using a quasi-experimental design across three instructional formats, traditional (no lab), Design I, and Design II, we evaluated students' conceptual learning gains, levels of data science (DS) readiness, and DS aspirations. The results indicated significant learning gains across all groups, with the highest gains observed in Design II. Students in both VSCL formats achieved greater gains in DS readiness than the traditional group, with Design II again yielding the largest gains across the demographic subgroups. Conversely, DS aspirations remained low or declined, suggesting a gap between skill acquisition and long-term interest. These findings highlight the value of structured, interactive computing environments in supporting statistical reasoning and building confidence in modern data tools. They also point to the need for intentional curricular bridges and career mentoring to help students translate early computing exposure into sustained academic and professional pathways in statistics and data science.

stat.OT

Statistical Theory in the Age of Machine-Assisted Mathematics: Rethinking How Theory Is Made and Taught

The computational revolution is advancing at an unprecedented pace. The combination of proof-assistant technologies and generative AI tools has recently enabled the solution of complex problems in pure mathematics at a scale that seemed unattainable only a few years ago. However, these technologies have not yet become standard tools in the development of statistical theory. In this paper, we do not present new theoretical results. Instead, we discuss five case studies involving classical problems in statistics and describe how they can be analyzed using a machine proof-checking. Our goal is not to propose a definitive workflow, but to stimulate reflection on how these technologies may transform theoretical research and advanced statistical education. We focus on two main aspects. First, statistical theory often compresses substantial mathematical content into expressions such as "under the usual regularity conditions". Formalization in a machine-verifiable language forces each assumption to be explicit, reveal hidden dependencies, and provide a deeper understanding of the formalized objects. Second, we argue that the statistical community could benefit from a collaborative effort to build repositories of formalized axioms, definitions, and theorems, supporting more precise and reliable theoretical developments. Finally, we discuss the role of these tools in graduate education. Just as high-level programming languages revolutionized empirical research by enabling rapid experimentation and prototyping, machine-assisted formalization may introduce a new paradigm for the development, verification, and communication of statistical theory.

stat.OT

Statistical Leadership of What? Statistics After AI

Statisticians have spent over a century arguing that we are more than calculators, usually by pointing to what else we know. AI is making that defense harder, since the list of what only statisticians can do grows shorter with each model release. AI makes claims cheap to generate and may eventually make the statistics behind them cheap too. However, a model cannot be answerable in the way that statistical practice requires. Statistical leadership then becomes a question of which claims we are there to answer for, including the ones we answer for in advance by building judgment into systems.

stat.OT