Talk:Erdős–Bacon number

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on November 29, 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.
WikiProject Mathematics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics.
Mathematics grading: Start Class Low Importance  Field: General

Not written in the style expected of an encyclopedia article. Tompw 13:22, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Why is this article a stub?

Why is this article a stub? I realize that it is short. But how much more can, or should, be said about this topic in an encyclopedia? I think it should qualify as a full-fledged article. Finell (Talk) 07:25, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Corrections/updates

Kleitman is apparently not in Good Will Hunting. http://www.oakland.edu/enp/related.html claims that he is, but links to a photoshopped image.

Update: There is a review of Good Will Hunting with a sidebar by Kleitman that makes clear he does appear in the final version:
Good Will Hunting, written by Ben Affleck and Matt Damon, directed by Gus Van Sant.
Review by Mark Saul, "Good Will Hunting," with sidebar by Daniel J. Kleitman, Notices of the AMS, April 1998 (85KB)
http://0-www.ams.org.library.uor.edu/notices/199804/review-saul.pdf
I'll come back later and try to figure out how to add this footnote. --Dylan Thurston 23:56, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Dave Bayer's Erdős number appears to be 2 now, since Persi Diaconis posthumously published a paper with Erdős. (Anybody know the history?) --Dylan Thurston 23:37, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

It's my understanding that Erdős had a Bacon number of 4 (from N is a Number) [1]. Since he has an Erdős number of 0, he would then have an Erdős-Bacon number of 4.

According to Bacon number, this is a coincidence in names, so I've noted it as such.

The article mentions that some guy with an Erdős-Bacon number of 5 had the lowest such number for some time: how is this possible? --Saforrest 21:44, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] John Platt

I removed the section on John Platt, since he has not appeared in a film and thus does not have a Bacon number. The removed material was as follows:

John Platt, a senior researcher at Microsoft, received the 2005 Scientific and Technical Achievement Oscar from Rachel McAdams. Rachel McAdams was in "My Name is Tanino" with Beau Starr. Beau Starr was in "Where the Truth Lies" with Kevin Bacon, giving Platt a Kevin Bacon number of 3. He co-authored a paper with John Shawe-Taylor, who wrote a paper with Christopher Godsil, who wrote a paper with Erdős, giving Platt an Erdős number of 3. Thus John Platt has an Erdős-Bacon number of 6.

Added: Reference for the televised, but I think non-film, appearence of Platt with McAdams that likely led to the above being included: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/261185_msftaward01.html )

[edit] Diaconis and Bayer

I believe that Persi Diaconis did not collaborate with Erdős. According to Diaconis' web page [2], he merely contributed to a book celebrating Erdős' birthday. Diaconis is also absent from a comprehensive list of Erdős' publications [3]. Someone more familiar with the works of Erdős should verify and correct this. Depending on its correctness, either Persi Diaconis or Dave Bayer will need to be fixed, too. Calbaer 00:32, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

I've reverted this section to its state prior to Dylan Thurston's unsourced claim of a lower Erdős number. Bayer is now listed with an Erdős-Bacon number of 5.Calbaer 19:44, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
It appears Erdős cowrote a technical report with Diaconis in 1977 that was published in a 2004 lecture collection, so I changed it back, using the most liberal definition of an Erdős number as a mathematical paper with common authors, regardless of method of publication. I included this information since otherwise someone else might look up Diaconis' publication list and make the same reversion. Calbaer 18:04, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Danica McKellar as only actor/actress?

Is this accurate? Other actors have been in doctoral programs (Bill Cosby, Mayim Bialik, Alice Garner) and had professorships (Ben Stein) so presumably someone else has a finite, if large, Erdős-Bacon number. Calbaer 01:30, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Ben Stein sounds the most plausible as economics dovetails to math and he was in a film with Kevin Bacon so has a Bacon number of 1.[4] He might have a lower one than even McKellar, but he'd need an Erdos number of 4 or less for that. The others may have an Erdos-Bacon number, but they need to have published something not just been in a program. Most likely McKellar's would remain lower than those named as her Bacon number is equal to their's and publishing in math likely gives her a lower Erdos number than them. I think that's the interest there that she is published in math and has a Bacon number of 2. Cosby's doctorate seems to have been honorary.--T. Anthony 16:29, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Here are some economists with Erdős numbers 5 and under if Ben Stein wrote a paper with any of them he'd be equal or lower than McKellar: Paul A. Samuelson, Kenneth J. Arrow, Tjalling C. Koopmans, Herbert A. Simon, Oskar Morgenstern, Gerard Debreu, Franco Modigliani, Robert M. Solow, Harry M. Markowitz, Merton H. Miller, John F. Nash, James J. Heckman, and Robert J. Aumann. Likewise he wrote something with his Dad Herbert Stein so if Herbert connects to one of the "less than 4" names there Ben could also equal McKellar. Anyone know how to check?--T. Anthony 04:03, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
I don't think Cosby's was technically honorary. He wrote a thesis, albeit one analyzing his own show. I'll write Stein and see if I can get a Curriculum vitae.... Calbaer 22:22, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Cosby legitimately earned a Doctorate of Education (Ed.D.) from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst in 1977. Yes, his dissertation was about his own show (Fat Albert and the Cosby Kids) but that show was designed to be educational; there is nothing wrong (or unique) about a dissertation analyzing the author's own work in the same field of inquiry.
Stein didn't answer, though I suppose I could try again. And, although this is all in fun, we might want some definitions here. We've expanded Bacon numbers to nonactors. Brian Greene appeared as himself, Dave Bayer and Daniel Kleitman appeared in nonspeaking roles as one of a crowd, although the former was, I believe, credited. We've expanded Erdos numbers to coauthors of technical reports and chapters. Diaconis' paper was never peer reviewed. I think it's more fun to use these relaxed definitions — otherwise only Danica McKellar would have a defined number — but it's still good to have some definitions. Does Natalie Portman count for her contributions to The Case for Israel? Do we include crew? Calbaer 02:53, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Portman does count, even using solely published academic papers (and, of course, starring roles in films). I added her, though if someone can reduce her number, that would be an improvement. Calbaer 20:33, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bertrand Russell?

I believe he was a mathematician to a large extent correct? Well Bertrand Russell has a Bacon number of 3.[5](I checked to make sure it's the right Russell) Does he have an Erdos Number?--T. Anthony 16:35, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Apparently Russell collaborated little so doesn't work. I found another that's more concrete. Richard Feynman has a Bacon number of three[6] and an Erdos Number of 3[7] giving him an Erdős-Bacon number of six. Unfortunately that's equal to McKellar's, but still this is sort of fun. I'm looking to see if Ben Stein has an Erdos number.--T. Anthony 03:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
There are two men named Matthew Skala, one with an Erdos number of 3 and one with a Bacon number of 3.67.158.76.126 21:32, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Actually, Richard Feynman is only nonactor (mentioned here) to have a finite, undisputable Erdős-Bacon number (since his role wasn't in a documentary nor as an extra nor as "himself"). I'll add it. Calbaer 01:29, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, Russell can be viewed as having a Erdos number of 3 [8]:
It would have been nice to find an Erdös number for the great twentieth century mathematician, philosopher, and activist Bertrand Russell. However, he collaborated very little, as did his coauthor Alfred North Whitehead. Thus we can't find a path using research articles. However, Sachi Sri Kantha points out the following, which also would give small Erdös numbers to several other prominent scientists: "Both Russell and Albert Einstein have impeccable credentials as mathematicians; equally impeccable are their credentials as anti-establishment peace activists against militarism and warfare. They authored the Russell-Einstein Manifesto of 1955, which was the last public document authored by Einstein, before his death. Though it is not a mathematical paper. this Russell-Einstein Manifesto is a valid collaboration of two peace activist scientists, given the tenor of McCarthy era. It is also counted as one of Russell's publication [source: A Bibliography of Bertrand Russell, vol.II, Serial Publications 1890-1990, by K.Blackwell and H.Ruja, Routledge, London, 1994, pp.194-196]. The specific title is TEXTS OF SCIENTISTS' APPEAL FOR ABOLITION OF WAR, New York Times, 10 July 1955, p.25. This was the original citation, and it had been reproduced umpteen times in other journals, magazines and newspapers. The worth of this Russell-Einstein Manifesto was that according to the citation in the bibliography: 'The entire Rusell-Einstein manifesto with Russell's prefatory remarks. The other signatories, besides Einstein, were Max Born, P.W.Bridgman, L.Infeld, F.Joliot-Curie, Linus Pauling, H.J.Muller, C.F.Powell, J.Rotblat and Hideko Yukawa.' Among these, at the time of its release, all except Einstein's collaborator Infeld and Rotblat were Nobelists in science. Later in 1995, Rotblat received the Nobel Peace Prize. Thus other Nobelists like Bridgman (physics 1946), Joliot-Curie (chemistry, 1935), H.J.Muller (medicine, 1946), Powell (physics, 1950), Rotblat (peace, 1995) and Yukawa (physics, 1949), all of whom have not been included in your current list of Erdos Number Nobelists, receive an Erdos Number of 3, courtesy of Einstein. Since Russell was also the only mathematician who received the Nobel literature prize, this Russell-Einstein Manifesto of 1955 is also indicative of his eminent stature as a literateur." 128.193.37.226 00:49, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
That's quite a disclaimer! Also, the Oracle of Bacon doesn't note what the links to IMDb do: that one of the links is through archival footage. Calbaer 01:59, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Waking Life

Apparently, Richard Linklater, who appeared in Waking Life (and directed it) has a Bacon number of 2:

Richard Linklater was in Beavis and Butt-Head Do America (1996) with John Doman John Doman was in Mystic River (2003) with Kevin Bacon

from the Oracle of Bacon.

Robert Solomon, David Sosa, Otto Hofmann, Aklilu Gebrewold, and Caveh Zahedi are all academics and may have finite Erdos numbers, and all appeared in this film (primarily as themselves), so they may have finite numbers as well.

[edit] Anyone else?

Where else to look beyond the eight (really seven) mentioned here? Many statesmen of the world both have Ph.D.s and have appeared in documentaries. Americans such as George Schultz, Woodrow Wilson, Condoleezza Rice, and Henry Kissinger, as well as Asians such as Manmohan Singh (India, economics), Mahmoud Abbas (Palestinian Authority, history), and Mohammad Reza Aref (Iran, electrical engineering) might be good candidates. I know for a fact that the last of these has an Erdős number no greater than four. Robert Reich might also be a good candidate if Harvard Business Review articles and Al Franken's ill-fated LateLine show count. Calbaer

Popular scientists seem to be good candidates, judging from the last few additions. Some websites have claimed one Bruce Resnick to have a Bacon number of two and Erdos of 1, but he is neither in IMDb nor in http://www.oakland.edu/enp/Erdos1 . Has this been debunked or is there something missing here? Also, does anyone know whether Sagan played "himself" or another named part in the obscure film mentioned? Calbaer 00:23, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
And Cornell West, who appeared in the Matrix series, not (strictly) playing himself. He probably has a large, but finite Erdős number. Septentrionalis 06:50, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
That would probably be a bit of a challenge. He rarely collaborates on peer-reviewed papers, and his few collaborators likely also collaborate little, due to the fields involved. They also don't seem as much into CVs as, say, mathematicians and engineers (judging from my few minutes spent searching). So it might take some work to find a finite Erdős number for Professor West. Or for, saying, actress Anna Deavere Smith. Interviews don't count as "collaborations" for the purpose of Erdős numbers. Although here's an interesting relaxation: One of the few coauthors of either Anna Deavere Smith or Cornell West was Henry Louis Gates, Jr. (who collaborated with both of them). Gates and Erdős simultaneously received honorary degrees from Emory University [9] (and thus might both have signed that infamous baseball). Anyone looking to find something more definitive should probably start here. Calbaer 22:14, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

What about non-famous people with an low erdos-bacon number? I know someone with an erdos-bacon number of 5 and I am sure there are many more out there. (212.145.150.218 00:38, 15 March 2007 (UTC))

If (and only if) you can document this person's E-B number, I suggest you add it. However, I don't think it's necessarily very easy to just figure out who has a low E-B number, among "non-famous people," since they're less well-known and not as notable (if notable at all). Cheeser1 01:18, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kevin Bacon joke

How difficult would it be to find someone with an Erdos number of 1 and get him in a film with kevin bacon? Blue Spider 12:24, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

New comments go at the bottom. Please create a section head for new comments. --Chris Griswold () 17:30, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] More Encyclopedia-like?

Anyone want to work on making this more encyclopedia-looking and more sourced? One problem is that, although all sources can be completely verified, putting all the necessary verification information in the article would be ungainly. Yet there are few enough candidates that it's worthwhile to list them all. Calbaer 01:51, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Undefined

Infinite may be clearer and more intuitive; what do the rest of you think? Septentrionalis 06:50, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Either's fine. I'm trying to be consistent with Erdős number and Bacon number, both of which seem to prefer "undefined." Calbaer 20:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
That's not surprising. Somebody went through not too long ago, and changed all instances of "infinite" to "undefined". "Infinite" was used for quite some time, so I expect a lot of people were fine with that. --Chan-Ho (Talk) 01:24, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Congrats

Congrats to all on surviving the AfD. Most of the complaints about the article did not address its content, but rather the concept of its existence, so its survival fares well for both its future and its verifiability. Like most other pages on Wikipedia, not all facts are completely referenced, but I believe all are verifiable (i.e., easily checked given the information presented here), so I'll take off the "verify" tag soon, barring any comments to the contrary. Also, since no one has chimed in with suggestions to improving tone (or comments on flaws in tone), I'll remove the "tone" tag along with it. Calbaer 20:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Verification drudgery

I'm fairly sure that everything on the page can be "easily" verified, where "ease" is a function of brainpower, not time. Bacon numbers can be found with the information provided, combined with the Oracle of Bacon, whereas Erdős numbers can be found here for those with subscriptions (e.g., anyone at a participating academic institution). So it's just a matter of using these to find and get references and annotate accordingly. This should probably be done in the chart, lest the text get unwieldy. Any help would be appreciated, even if you only have time to do one or two. Calbaer 22:14, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Delete this!

Isn't this WP:BJAODN material? Who are the nimrods who voted keep in the AfD? My gawd, it must be the end of the world! linas 05:47, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What standards of Bacon number?

If we accept that Hank Aaron has an Erdős number simply by signing a baseball together, what sort of specious standards can we use to calculate Bacon number? For example, I was a programmer on Sprung, which was written by Colleen McGuinness, who wrote on Miss Match which starred Alicia Silverstone, who has a Bacon number of 1, giving me a (very weak) Bacon number of 3. My Erdős number is definitely 5 (I coauthored a couple papers with Pfeiffer, who coauthored a paper with Hartley, who coauthored a paper with Gupta, who coauthored a paper with Frank Harary). Do I therefore have a (very weak) Erdős-Bacon number of 8? (I know, I know, video game credits probably don't count in the Bacon number. But I have a feeling that Erdős-Bacon numbers aren't quite as rare as the article makes it out to be.) 216.254.25.199 07:43, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

It is explicitly stated that this is somewhat of a joke ("facetious and fatuous"), but, seeing as how it is on the official Erdős number project page ([10]), it should nevertheless be stated. Such definitions in general, however, are a bit too fast and loose. It would, for example, give such entertainment academic perenials as Anna Deavere Smith, Cornell West, and Henry Louis Gates, Jr. Erdős numbers of 1 or 2, which they aren't generally said to have. In order not to be OR, the article should have some minimum standards for "newly discovered" folks. At the bare, bare minimum, Erdős numbers should be determined by shared publications (if not necessarily academic or peer-reviewed publications) and Bacon numbers by common entertainment appearances (if not credited movie roles). I guess you could argue working together as being a common "entertainment appearance," but that would give me a Bacon number, since I worked at Xerox PARC at the same time as Geoff Nunberg, Bacon number 3. However, without a high-profile video (e.g., movie, documentary, television), I'd say to leave us out. (In fact, perhaps John Platt should be left out, since an awards show is rather tenuous, even if it might've been covered in visual media.) Calbaer 17:37, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
Point taken, though I didn't just work at the same company as Colleen McGuinness, I actually worked on the same shipping entertainment product as her, albeit not a film project. 207.171.180.101 23:19, 20 December 2006 (UTC) (at work, so different IP address)
I understand, although Xerox PARC is not at large as its reputation would suggest. I'm still mulling over Dr. Platt — what do you think? Unlike Aaron's Erdos number, Platt's Bacon number seems self-assigned, so I'm tempted to leave him off (or put him in comments), lest others add other cases where no film role is shared. Stephen Hawking might be best omitted, too, until we can find a link through A Brief History of Time.... Calbaer 01:00, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stephen Hawking in Star Trek: The Next Generation

I think it's incorrect to say that Stephen Hawking appeared as himself in ST:TNG; he appeared as a videogame-like holographic reconstruction of himself. There's a subtle difference here: as himself, he had to behave like himself, but as an AI, he had to act as the imaginary future AI designer thought the primitive Stephen Hawking would act - his acting was as demanding as those of the actors that represented virtual-Einstein and virtual-Newton. Albmont 19:57, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Appearances as "himself" are often just as demanding as "regular acting," and, while I do see the distinction, we need to rely upon reliable sources — not our own opinions — for what's in the article. This is important not only due to its being a policy, but more so because people like to level unreliable sources accusations against the article because they don't like it. IMDb lists the performance as "as himself," so that's what I went with. Calbaer 20:27, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Masi Oka

Does anybody know if Masi Oka has any publications? If so, his EB number is probably pretty low - his Bacon number is 2. --Arcadian 18:53, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I think it's highly doubtful. Percentage-wise, few people without graduate education have academic publications. Also, I can't find anything in Google Scholar or DBLP. Calbaer 19:02, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Table Sort

Shouldn't the table be in ascending e-b number order, rather than alphabetical? Danthelawyer 22:55, 2 March 2007 (UTC)Danthelawyer

I like alphabetical since things are easier to find. Also, alphabetical order would imply that, say, Hank Aaron would have a "better" number than Danica McKellar, when Aaron's number is not meant to be taken as literally as the others. Finally, it would imply an actual ranking, when the list is (most likely) incomplete. Calbaer 02:14, 3 March 2007 (UTC)