Dear morphometricians,
I would like to thank all those who openly and privately expressed their support on the issue of the BG-PCA papers, which I, regretfully, had to make public.

I have to stress that I am no better than anyone else and certainly worse than very many. I make many mistakes (including on ethics). I can only do my best to acknowledge my errors and apologize.


Unless I see another inaccurate report of what went (clearly) wrong, I am not going to pursue the issue further. Otherwise, I'll have to take more serious and formal steps. To be fully clear, as I live in the country where every wrong-doing is justified with claims about misunderstandings, there was no misunderstanding whatsoever but just a lack of the most basic respect towards coauthors. Story over, I hope.


More apologies to Jim and Paul for my delays with our BG-PCA paper. They know the reasons, and I hope we may have soon a draft ready for submission. I anticipate that, although I may be first author, Jim will be the corresponding one: the long discussions and interactions with Jim and Paul, and especially Jim's extensive simulations (an order of magnitude better than mine) made us understand the problem much better and in fact, in the course of this, Jim found some other interesting issues (not strictly related to BG-PCA), that I hope he will publish in another paper of his.

Sincerely

Andrea


On 16/05/2019 00:37, Una Vidarsdottir wrote:
Thank you Andrea for clarifying this. You are one of the most honest and modest people I know, and I am glad that your side of this story is now in the open. You have my support, as always.
Una

On Wed, 15 May 2019, 06:33 andrea cardini, <alcard...@gmail.com <mailto:alcard...@gmail.com>> wrote:

    I have to correct Fred on this:
     > we accelerated our writing. My paper was the first to be finished,
     > probably because it is a single-authored item by an emeritus with no
     > other obligations,

    No, WE did not accelerate the writing. We started a cooperation, after
    my small finding, and we were supposed to work all together on this. At
    some stage, we heard no more from Fred and I suggested to have two
    companion papers, but NEVER got an answer from Fred.
    Months later, Fred let us know he was presenting and discussing results
    (without ever asking me if I was OK with this). Finally, HE decided to
    go on on his own, submit and announce in this list (again letting me
    know after he was done). This is an accurate reconstruction of the
    events. The other one is not and Fred was not unaware that I wasn't OK:
    before the preprint he just announced, he (again without ever asking)
    had already done an informal presubmission to a journal and the journal
    has my written complaint about it.

    I let the morphometric community judge if this is the appropriate
    behaviour. Certainly it is not what I teach students, but possibly
    it is
    what a famous retired emeritus and one of the leader of a scientific
    community can do.

    All the best

    Andrea

    PS
    On a technical side, as I never thought that CVA was the source of all
    evil and BG-PCA a simple solution, here too I agree that the method has
    some problems but I am more than confident that it can still be WISELY
    applied in many cases. That small N (especially when one works with
    small differences) and large p (numbers of variables) are not desirable
    in very many types of analyses is written in all introductory textbook
    on multivariate stats (at least those written in simple
    non-mathematical
    language for non-numerically skilled people like me).
    In relation to this, there's a point I raised many times for years in
    this list and in some of my papers: one uses the specific landmarks
    required for her/his specific aim (I am in debt to Paul O'Higgins for
    teaching me this). Semilandmarks are a great tool but should be used
    when really needed and bearing in mind that almost inevitably p will
    become big and that might create problems. There are different views on
    this, including that having many points makes beautiful pictures: I
    agree but probably most of the time that is not the aim of a biologist.
    However, there might be cases when even with small N semilandmarks
    might
    be a huge step forward and possibly the best example I know it's the
    virtual reconstruction of fossils (further analysis of those data may
    then be harder, because of very big p and small N).
    I definitely share the frustration of many taxonomists and
    palaeontologists who have often very precious material and very small
    samples and want to get the most out of them. Regardless of p/N
    problems, estimates of means will be then inevitably inaccurate (and
    sometimes even biased, as the sample could be few and maybe related
    individuals of a rare species). Sometimes those means could be OKish
    (macroevolutionary analyses with very large differences?); most of the
    time they will be as accurate as trying to estimate the average body
    height of Italian men using a sample of 10 men from the same small
    region of Italy. Again, not my discovery: it's all in the introductory
    stats textbook, but I myself too often forget about it.



--
    Dr. Andrea Cardini
    Researcher, Dipartimento di Scienze Chimiche e Geologiche,
    Università di
    Modena e Reggio Emilia, Via Campi, 103 - 41125 Modena - Italy
    tel. 0039 059 2058472

    Adjunct Associate Professor, Centre for Forensic Anthropology, The
    University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley WA 6009,
    Australia

    E-mail address: alcard...@gmail.com <mailto:alcard...@gmail.com>,
    andrea.card...@unimore.it <mailto:andrea.card...@unimore.it>
    WEBPAGE: https://sites.google.com/site/alcardini/home/main

    FREE Yellow BOOK on Geometric Morphometrics:
    https://tinyurl.com/2013-Yellow-Book

    ESTIMATE YOUR GLOBAL FOOTPRINT:
    http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/calculators/
    SUPPORT: secondwarning.org <http://secondwarning.org>

-- MORPHMET may be accessed via its webpage at http://www.morphometrics.org
    ---
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
    Groups "MORPHMET" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
    send an email to morphmet+unsubscr...@morphometrics.org
    <mailto:morphmet%2bunsubscr...@morphometrics.org>.


--

Dr. Andrea Cardini
Researcher, Dipartimento di Scienze Chimiche e Geologiche, Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia, Via Campi, 103 - 41125 Modena - Italy
tel. 0039 059 2058472

Adjunct Associate Professor, Centre for Forensic Anthropology, The University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley WA 6009, Australia

E-mail address: alcard...@gmail.com, andrea.card...@unimore.it
WEBPAGE: https://sites.google.com/site/alcardini/home/main

FREE Yellow BOOK on Geometric Morphometrics: https://tinyurl.com/2013-Yellow-Book

ESTIMATE YOUR GLOBAL FOOTPRINT: http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/calculators/
SUPPORT: secondwarning.org

--
MORPHMET may be accessed via its webpage at http://www.morphometrics.org
--- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MORPHMET" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to morphmet+unsubscr...@morphometrics.org.

Reply via email to