Recently I see some people complaining about the flood of ML papers and their decrease in “quality”. If you want to feel good, look at some papers in fields like finance, where experimental protocols, benchmarks, and statistical significance are plain hilarious. ML is 
-
But isn’t comparing a largely empirical science to a theoretic field an unfair comparison? Are there experimental protocols in math? An honest question, I’ve actually never read anything from a math journal.
It was just an amused throwaway remark about quality - for a certain type of intellectual quality, math has incredibly high standards. Papers will often show remarkable virtuosity & insight (far more than most other fields, IME). OTOH, that's not really what we should care about
-
-
I was waiting for you to say "we should care more about research distillation" -- I profess myself mildly disappointed
-
(it was a joke, just in case. I am bad at jokes)
End of conversation
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.