50 Years of Data Science. Issue 4 (2nd October 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Donoho, David
• Is Part Of: Journal of computational and graphical statistics. Volume 26:Issue 4(2017)
• Page Start: 745
• Page End: 766
• Publication Date: 2017-10-02
• Subjects: Cross-study analysis -- Data analysis -- Data science -- Meta analysis -- Predictive modeling -- Quantitative programming environments -- Statistics; Mathematical statistics -- Data processing -- Periodicals; Mathematical statistics -- Graphic methods -- Periodicals; 519.50285
• DOI: 10.1080/10618600.2017.1384734
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1061-8600

Abstract

ABSTRACT: More than 50 years ago, John Tukey called for a reformation of academic statistics. In "The Future of Data Analysis, " he pointed to the existence of an as-yet unrecognized science, whose subject of interest was learning from data, or "data analysis." Ten to 20 years ago, John Chambers, Jeff Wu, Bill Cleveland, and Leo Breiman independently once again urged academic statistics to expand its boundaries beyond the classical domain of theoretical statistics; Chambers called for more emphasis on data preparation and presentation rather than statistical modeling; and Breiman called for emphasis on prediction rather than inference. Cleveland and Wu even suggested the catchy name "data science" for this envisioned field. A recent and growing phenomenon has been the emergence of "data science" programs at major universities, including UC Berkeley, NYU, MIT, and most prominently, the University of Michigan, which in September 2015 announced a $100M "Data Science Initiative" that aims to hire 35 new faculty. Teaching in these new programs has significant overlap in curricular subject matter with traditional statistics courses; yet many academic statisticians perceive the new programs as "cultural appropriation." This article reviews some ingredients of the current "data science moment, " including recent commentary about data science in the popular media, and about how/whether data science is really different from statistics. The now-contemplated field of data science amounts to a superset of the fields of statistics and machine learning, which adds some technology for "scaling up" to "big data." This chosen superset is motivated by commercial rather than intellectual developments. Choosing in this way is likely to miss out on the really important intellectual event of the next 50 years. Because all of science itself will soon become data that can be mined, the imminent revolution in data science is not about mere "scaling up, " but instead the emergence of scientific studies of data analysis science-wide. In the future, we will be able to predict how a proposal to change data analysis workflows would impact the validity of data analysis across all of science, even predicting the impacts field-by-field. Drawing on work by Tukey, Cleveland, Chambers, and Breiman, I present a vision of data science based on the activities of people who are "learning from data, " and I describe an academic field dedicated to improving that activity in an evidence-based manner. This new field is a better academic enlargement of statistics and machine learning than today's data science initiatives, while being able to accommodate the same short-term goals. Based on a presentation at the Tukey Centennial Workshop, Princeton, NJ, September 18, 2015.