We examine the possible consequences of a change in law school admissions in the United States from an affirmative action system based on race to one based on socioeconomic class. Using data from the 1991–1996 Law School Admission Council Bar Passage Study, students were reassigned attendance by simulation to law school tiers by transferring the affirmative action advantage for black students to students from low socioeconomic backgrounds. The hypothetical academic outcomes for the students were then multiply-imputed to quantify the uncertainty of the resulting estimates. The analysis predicts dramatic decreases in the numbers of black students in top law school tiers, suggesting that class-based affirmative action is insufficient to maintain racial diversity in prestigious law schools. Furthermore, there appear to be no statistically significant changes in the graduation and bar passage rates of students in any demographic group. The results thus provide evidence that, other than increasing their representation in upper tiers, current affirmative action policies relative to a socioeconomic-based system neither substantially help nor harm minority academic outcomes, contradicting the predictions of the “mismatch” hypothesis, which asserts otherwise.

Nonlinear non-Gaussian state-space models are ubiquitous in statistics, econometrics, information engineering and signal processing. Particle methods, also known as Sequential Monte Carlo (SMC) methods, provide reliable numerical approximations to the associated state inference problems. However, in most applications, the state-space model of interest also depends on unknown static parameters that need to be estimated from the data. In this context, standard particle methods fail and it is necessary to rely on more sophisticated algorithms. The aim of this paper is to present a comprehensive review of particle methods that have been proposed to perform static parameter estimation in state-space models. We discuss the advantages and limitations of these methods and illustrate their performance on simple models.

Standard tests of the “no-treatment-effect” hypothesis for a comparative experiment include permutation tests, the Wilcoxon rank sum test, two-sample $t$ tests, and Fisher-type randomization tests. Practitioners are aware that these procedures test different no-effect hypotheses and are based on different modeling assumptions. However, this awareness is not always, or even usually, accompanied by a clear understanding or appreciation of these differences. Borrowing from the rich literatures on causality and finite-population sampling theory, this paper develops a modeling framework that affords answers to several important questions, including: exactly what hypothesis is being tested, what model assumptions are being made, and are there other, perhaps better, approaches to testing a no-effect hypothesis? The framework lends itself to clear descriptions of three main inference approaches: process-based, randomization-based, and selection-based. It also promotes careful consideration of model assumptions and targets of inference, and highlights the importance of randomization. Along the way, Fisher-type randomization tests are compared to permutation tests and a less well-known Neyman-type randomization test. A simulation study compares the operating characteristics of the Neyman-type randomization test to those of the other more familiar tests.

In independent component analysis it is assumed that the components of the observed random vector are linear combinations of latent independent random variables, and the aim is then to find an estimate for a transformation matrix back to these independent components. In the engineering literature, there are several traditional estimation procedures based on the use of fourth moments, such as FOBI (fourth order blind identification), JADE (joint approximate diagonalization of eigenmatrices), and FastICA, but the statistical properties of these estimates are not well known. In this paper various independent component functionals based on the fourth moments are discussed in detail, starting with the corresponding optimization problems, deriving the estimating equations and estimation algorithms, and finding asymptotic statistical properties of the estimates. Comparisons of the asymptotic variances of the estimates in wide independent component models show that in most cases JADE and the symmetric version of FastICA perform better than their competitors.

The present paper deals with the life and some aspects of the scientific contributions of the mathematician René Gateaux, killed during World War I at the age of 25. Though he died very young, he left interesting results in functional analysis. In particular, he was among the first to try to construct an integral over an infinite-dimensional space. His ideas were extensively developed later by Paul Lévy. Among other things, Lévy interpreted Gateaux’s integral in a probabilistic framework that later contributed to the construction of the Wiener measure. This article tries to explain this singular personal and professional destiny in pre- and postwar France.

Alan E. Gelfand was born April 17, 1945, in the Bronx, New York. He attended public grade schools and did his undergraduate work at what was then called City College of New York (CCNY, now CUNY), excelling at mathematics. He then surprised and saddened his mother by going all the way across the country to Stanford to graduate school, where he completed his dissertation in 1969 under the direction of Professor Herbert Solomon, making him an academic grandson of Herman Rubin and Harold Hotelling. Alan then accepted a faculty position at the University of Connecticut (UConn) where he was promoted to tenured associate professor in 1975 and to full professor in 1980. A few years later he became interested in decision theory, then empirical Bayes, which eventually led to the publication of Gelfand and Smith [J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 85 (1990) 398–409], the paper that introduced the Gibbs sampler to most statisticians and revolutionized Bayesian computing. In the mid-1990s, Alan’s interests turned strongly to spatial statistics, leading to fundamental contributions in spatially-varying coefficient models, coregionalization, and spatial boundary analysis (wombling). He spent 33 years on the faculty at UConn, retiring in 2002 to become the James B. Duke Professor of Statistics and Decision Sciences at Duke University, serving as chair from 2007–2012. At Duke, he has continued his work in spatial methodology while increasing his impact in the environmental sciences. To date, he has published over 260 papers and 6 books; he has also supervised 36 Ph.D. dissertations and 10 postdocs. This interview was done just prior to a conference of his family, academic descendants, and colleagues to celebrate his 70th birthday and his contributions to statistics which took place on April 19–22, 2015 at Duke University.

Tadeusz Caliński was born in Poznań, Poland in 1928. Despite the absence of formal secondary eduction for Poles during the Second World War, he entered the University of Poznań in 1948, initially studying agronomy and in later years mathematics. From 1953 to 1988 he taught statistics, biometry and experimental design at the Agricultural University of Poznań. During this period he founded and developed the Poznań inter-university school of mathematical statistics and biometry, which has become one of the most important schools of this type in Poland and beyond. He has supervised 24 Ph.D. students, many of whom are currently professors at a variety of universities. He is now Professor Emeritus.

Among many awards, in 1995 Professor Caliński received the Order of Polonia Restituta for his outstanding achievements in the fields of Education and Science. In 2012 the Polish Statistical Society awarded him The Jerzy Spława-Neyman Medal for his contribution to the development of research in statistics in Poland. Professor Caliński in addition has Doctoral Degrees honoris causa from the Agricultural University of Poznań and the Warsaw University of Life Sciences.

His research interests include mathematical statistics and biometry, with applications to agriculture, natural sciences, biology and genetics. He has published over 140 articles in scientific journals as well as, with Sanpei Kageyama, two important books on the randomization approach to the design and analysis of experiments.

He has been extremely active and successful in initiating and contributing to fruitful international research cooperation between Polish statisticians and biometricians and their colleagues in various countries, particularly in the Netherlands, France, Italy, Great Britain, Germany, Japan and Portugal. The conversations in addition cover the history of biometry and experimental design in Poland and the early influence of British statisticians.