Math merely provides you with one way to formally reason about ML. But to reason about it, you must first understand it.
Math is a tool, a language of sorts. Having a math background does not magically allow to "understand" anything, and in particular not ML.
-
-
-
And math will not do the understanding for you. If it did, mathematicians would dominate the field of ML, which they most definitely do not.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Its just accurate when you are implementing and using machine learning for practical work and problem. (Engineering)
-
When you want analyse ML algorithms every thing is different. algorithm analysis is poor mathematics. (Computer science)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Relevant xkcd: http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/purity.png …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
probability theory, together with hamiltonian mechanics can help http://arxiv.org/abs/1608.08225
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I've noticed physicist tend to convert well to just about anything.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Physics demands curiosity driven motivation, intelligence and perseverance, & solid combo of math and empiricism.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
.
@fchollet Straw man. No one claims maths alone provides understanding of any other field (even physics)! (1/3)Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.