Math is a tool, a language of sorts. Having a math background does not magically allow to "understand" anything, and in particular not ML.
Math merely provides you with one way to formally reason about ML. But to reason about it, you must first understand it.
-
-
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.
-
In my experience, physicists tend to convert to ML more easily than people from a math or stats background. Interesting to note.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
how do you plan to 'understand' it?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Do we have another formal way to reason about ML rather than using stat theory, iid variables, and theory of optimization?
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.