Math & CS can be used to model chess, but you don't need to understand this formalism in order to play chess. Not even at the highest level.
The same is true of the relationship between math & ML. Doing ML relies on intuitions which come from the practice of ML, not from math.
-
-
In fact, it is remarkable how little math baggage most ML practitioners have. In many ways the field would benefit from better math literacy
-
I would imagine most fields have a significant shadow price for math literacy, I wonder if ML is marginally larger.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
That only follows from chess. A better analogy is with physics. Physics has needed increasing levels of maths. Intuition and math
-
You're saying we only need Faradays. F. did brilliant work but did not produce anything as fundamental as the maxwell equations
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
what if the (best) solution is counterintuitive? E.g. early digital communications was based on the intuition that in order to
-
reduce the reception error, due to noisy bandlimited channel, you just have to raise the power of the signal. Shannon
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.