what went wrong, and/or what motivated the authors to put this version of their draft on arxiv?
-
-
Prikaži ovu nit
-
Novi razgovor -
-
-
yes, i was similarly confused, this might become the standard for AI papers in the 2020ies. BTW, it might be a positivd developnent, if researchers also report negative results following the announcement.
-
What's more likely to happen is that if there are negative results, the paper won't be updated. There are no incentives to encourage it.
- Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
A new version of the paper has just been submitted to arXiv show our current results on Cora and Pubmed (need some days to reflect). The source code is also released via github at https://github.com/jwzhanggy/Graph-Bert … It will be great if you can also help promote the code, thanks in advance.
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
Easy answer to me. The authors must have been on their way home for Chinese New Year. The holiday may last up to a month and they don’t want to lost their idea to someone else during this time.
-
Arxiv isn’t a publication. You don’t get to claim the idea just by barfing out a paper without empirical validation.
- Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Probably already irrelevant with Reformer making its rounds.
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
I've already share this paper. I am also very curious why they did do that.
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.