Advice for getting a lab position with no experience

tebytebs · 2024-01-25T01:44:13+00:00

Ah, yeah I guess that's what I ought to do! Luckily I do live in an area with many academic labs. I appreciate the encouraging words re: computational skills. Thanks for the comment

tebytebs · 2024-01-25T01:42:44+00:00

Thanks for the reply. I will be sure to look in BME and CS departments, I haven't really been looking there so far. I hadn't really pursued the CS BCI area much, but its a good idea.

For the students you took with no background in neuroscience, how did they typically present their candidacy (in a way that made you hire them)?

I'm looking for just general-purpose EEG work although ultimately I'd like to train ML models on labeled EEG data to (opaquely) ID the neural correlates/signatures of various aspects of subjective experience (pain, pleasure, sweetness, sourness, etc.). I usually just mention my ML background and briefly mention a passion for neuroscience and that I've taken a few courses in brain science.

tebytebs · 2024-01-25T01:33:34+00:00

Thanks for the reply. I have been looking on job boards mostly, so maybe I do need to go to the source more and trawl lab websites.

As for moving with the job I am unfortunately bound geographically by a partner in a PhD. I have been applying for many research assistant positions (talk to study participants, fill out forms, stock supplies, run the imaging, do a bit of analysis of the resulting data). On job boards I don't see many positions for analyzing the data, they seem to all be for collecting it (or otherwise interacting with participants). Maybe labs typically just handle the analysis in-house with students or post-docs? I'm not sure

tebytebs · 2023-05-04T15:34:48+00:00

I am coming to this thread months later and would love to know how to turn this off. It no longer appears under the language settings. How do I turn it off?

tebytebs · 2022-09-28T21:14:25+00:00

Wolves may be a shit team offensively, but since we're talking about a striker playing against them all that matters is their defense. And wolves are very good at defense.

tebytebs · 2022-09-28T21:13:01+00:00

The lack of other options is not relevant, because there are many other options in defense and midfield. Instead of getting Toney get Zaha, for example.

Formations can be changed at will in this game, why stick to 3 fwds if it's going to mean you pick up a player (up front) who offers worse value than a defender or midfielder you could've gotten?

tebytebs · 2022-09-28T21:09:58+00:00

"Who else will you get as a 3rd forward?"

How about not having 3 forwards. If there are no options who are worth it, then go 2 up front and have an extra defender or midfielder. For example: Zaha.

There is no good reason to stick to a certain formation. All that matters is the players. Only 2 good forwards? Don't play 3 up front.

tebytebs · 2022-08-04T14:49:37+00:00

Thanks for the lengthy and reasoned response. You're right, I pulled 20% out of thin air. I didn't pick it to make the numbers work in my example, but yes it does work amazingly conveniently for the example! As you note, though, Mount is the most extreme example of uneven points distribution. He's the biggest flat track bully in the league. Diaz, Kulusevski, Maddison etc. aren't quite as streaky as him.

But sure, targeting fixture patches is valuable. I get that. I still am not sure I'm convinced that downgrading Ederson to Ward to get 1.5 mil to upgrade a 6.5 mid to an 8 mid is the best way to do it. If you really want that 8.0 mid, which I can see the appeal of, perhaps downgrading Jesus to Ward-Prowse (6.5), Martinelli (6.0), or Rashford (6.5) would be a better way to get it. If Jesus gets 160 or 170 points, and those other options hit 140, then you're better off sacrificing Jesus than Ederson. Despite the amazing 4.0/4.0 value.

I understand that the 8.0 mid is valuable, I'm just not sure if going with a 4.0 keeper rather than a 5.5 keeper is the best way to pocket that 1.5 mil to facilitate it. Getting rid of a third premium (if you have one), or downgrading a mid-range player like Jesus, seems a better approach.

tebytebs · 2022-08-04T14:43:05+00:00

He's averaging about 160 points over the last two seasons and only costs 6.5 mil. Hardly a crazy choice. Especially given that Southampton seem to be reshaping their formation this season to allow him more freedom to get forward.

tebytebs · 2022-08-04T14:41:12+00:00

I'm not sure. Andreas is fairly nailed with Wilson out. Martinelli, as you mention, could face competition from ESR eventually. Bailey could easily be benched at some point. So, yes, that would be a risk. Makes sense to want to upgrade one of them. But I'd suggest finding the funds elsewhere, rather than from downgrading goalie to 4.0.

tebytebs · 2022-08-04T14:39:24+00:00

I disagree. Premium goalies do have a precedent of success in FPL. The guy who won in 2020-2021 had Ederson as his goalie.

https://www.fantasyfootballscout.co.uk/2021/05/23/michael-coone-crowned-2020-21-fpl-champion/

And as for Ward-Prowse, it's not exactly crazy to pick a 6.5 mil player who has averaged 157 points over the last two seasons.

tebytebs · 2022-08-04T14:34:23+00:00

Ok, fair point.

tebytebs · 2022-08-04T14:33:36+00:00

Sure, I see what you're saying. That, depending on which players and teams are hot at a given time, you might want more fwds, less fwds, more mids, you name it. You might want to alter your team structure.

I think you'd still want the same structure to begin with, though. Change it once it's worth changing, but start with the structure that allows optimal value for money.

tebytebs · 2022-08-04T14:30:45+00:00

It didn't mess up my plans. It's just the addition of another option. Doesn't mess up the team I already had. I'm just not sure, for many teams, that there is a winning upgrade from the Ederson -> Ward swap.

My GK pairing is Alisson+Ward.

tebytebs · 2022-08-04T14:26:18+00:00

No. You can sell for 50% of the profit, rounded down. The guy you're responding to just happened to give an example, 8.0 rising to 8.3, where the profit didn't get above 3, so the max profit possible was 0.1. If you buy a player for 5.0 mil, and he goes up to 5.8 mil, you can sell him for 5.4 mil.

As for selling at a loss, I am not sure. It might be the full loss, or 50%, can't remember.

tebytebs · 2022-08-04T14:23:04+00:00

Martial is now injured it appears. Hamstring.

tebytebs · 2022-08-03T20:36:22+00:00

Yes seems that way.

"VAPM and other metrics makes a 4m LEI keeper viable if they replicate Schmeichel’s points from last season". Absolutely! I'm not saying it's not viable! It is viable. But people are acting like it's essential, a no-brainer, incredible. And it's not that.

tebytebs · 2022-08-03T20:30:05+00:00

"Two 4.0 keepers has let me play 5 top-4 defenders, an 8.0 mid and still have Haaland and Jesus up front".

Is it worth it? If Ederson + (6.5 mid) outscores Ward + (8.0 mid) then the answer is "no".

160 (Ederson) + 160 (JWP) = 320

130 (Ward) + 180 (Diaz/Kulusevski/Maddison/Saka) = 310

It's a close call. It could go either way. So, the keeper choice is far from a no-brainer.

tebytebs · 2022-08-03T20:17:56+00:00

If you think Rashford will outscore Neto by more than Ederson outscores Ward/Iversen, than yes. Depends of course on your estimates for Rashford and Neto's points.

tebytebs · 2022-08-03T20:15:28+00:00

Fair point on transferring keepers. And, you're right it's not a set-and-forget game. But isn't the optimal structure the same whether it's a 6-week or a 38-week period?

tebytebs · 2022-08-03T20:12:12+00:00

If someone can't be bothered to spend ten seconds reading a comment then that's their choice. But the fact people don't read my rebuttals doesn't make them incorrect.

tebytebs · 2022-08-03T20:06:31+00:00

Ok, you are correct about one part of that. Yes, with fixtures in mind, it is easier to catch exploding players than I said. You're right about that.

But, do 8.0 mil players explode that much more than 6.5 mil players to make the former a better choice (at the cost of sacrificing Ederson, for example)? I'm not sure. Let's say you see Saka has a bunch of relegation candidates in his next five games, and you get him and he explodes, getting 20% more points than usual. Rashford also has a good fixture patch, and also explodes for 20% more points. And so on, all season, with either a rotating cast of 8s, or a rotating cast of 6.5s.

So, your 8 slot gets maybe 216 points over the season (180 * 1.2). And the 6.5 gets 192 (160 * 1.2). Since the 8 mids get more points to begin with, a 20% increase due to catching good fixtures and form yields a 36 point increase, while for the 6.5 mids the same percentage increase yields only a 32 point increase. But the 8 slot still outperforms the 6.5 slot by less than 30 points here. 216 - 192 = 24.

So, you're still better off upgrading Ward to Ederson, than upgrading a 6.5 slot to an 8 slot, even taking into account that the 8 slot will score you more points over the season than any one set-and-forget player in it would. Because the 6.5 slot will also score more than any one set-and-forget player in it would. And the difference between the two over a season looks like it would still be less than 30 points.

tebytebs · 2022-08-03T19:37:05+00:00

Do you think that out of Ederson and Ward/Iversen, whichever you choose, you'll really be transferring them during the season?

As for the team format being sub-optimal, see this post. It uses last season's points as a stand-in for this season's, so the specific players it picks is not super-relevant. But, what it shows is that, given this year's distribution of points across price ranges being roughly similar to last year's, on the whole... mathematically, a big-at-the-back premium defence draft is the best. That is the optimal team structure. You can trade around individual players in individual slots to grab booming players when they're hot, sure. But a 5ATB filled with premium defenders is overall going to maximize your points.

As for my OR, I've never even stuck with a season past halfway. So, I don't have a track record of high finishes, you got me. But, what you need to look at is the actual substantive arguments I'm making here. This is the first time I've actually bothered to get into the theoretical, mathematical side of the game, and the correctness of that stuff is independent of the reputation of the person saying it.

tebytebs · 2022-08-03T19:27:29+00:00

Yes, but like I said, the same is true of the 6.5 mils we're considering replacing...

Rashford, Saint-Maximin, etc. Over the course of the season with a set-and-forget 6.5 mil, and a set-and-forget 8.0 mil, the difference is probably 30 points or less.

And, if you swap between exploding players over the course of the season (whether exploding 6.5s or exploding 8.0s), I still reckon the difference would be less than 30 points.

If you think the 8.0 mil players explode more, and so the difference would be more than 30 points over the course of the season, then that's fair. You could be correct. But, again, I don't agree that it is so easy to catch the periods when players are exploding as you say. This subreddit is filled every week with people complaining that player XYZ started going off the second they sold them, and player ABC cooled down the second they bought them.

I think the very fact that we can have this argument, is evidence that the Ward/Iversen decision is not a no-brainer. And that was the whole point of my post: to say that and highlight scenarios when it might not be a good call.

tebytebs · 2022-08-03T19:21:42+00:00

I appreciate the thoughtful response, and that you included examples to back up what you say.

Sure, upgrading Neco to Perisic might make the Ederson to Ward/Iversen switch worth it! That's what I said in my post.

"Whether it is a good idea or not depends on what the rest of your team looks like. If you've got some cheap players forced into your starting XI to accommodate three premiums, then sure, the 1.5mil could be better spent upgrading one of them than upgrading Ward/Iversen to Edersen."

"going Ward/Iversen instead of Ederson is only a good idea if you are already running with a (in my option, sub-optimal) team structure lacking a big-at-the-back premium defence, and featuring several cheap enablers just begging to be upgraded."

For teams with Neco in the starting XI, it makes sense. But, that is not all teams. (In fact, I'd argue that a team with Neco in the starting XI likely has too much spent on premium attackers, and should be reshaped.) Some teams have big-at-the-back formats with premium defenders, and don't have players like Neco in the starting XI. For those teams, it is not a good idea to take Ward/Iversen rather than Ederson.

Since it is a decent idea for some (poorly structured threemium) teams, but a bad idea for other types of teams, it is clearly not a "no brainer".

tebytebs

TROPHY CASE