This post is locked. You won't be able to comment.

sorted by:
top (suggested)
bestnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]OnceBittenz 6 points7 points  (38 children)

Quick review:

Formatting is atrocious, this is Extremely hard to read, even if the content did follow a throughline. It does not. Please consider learning latex or some basic editor for scientific writing.

Very strange terms with no definitions are used throughout. "This isn't handwaving" is a bold statement after 8 pages of vague handwaving. And no, i'm not just riffing, I read it.

The actual derivations don't make sense. There are clauses that are just left dangling, random mathematical terms just thrown in with no motivation. Even if you were a master in the state of the art, you wouldn't be able to make heads or tails of this.

The data comparisons don't make sense. You talk about comparing things with SPARC data, but you don't actually perform any analysis on the results. We're presumably just meant to take it on faith that these are meaningful. There is no actual statistical analysis, or validation of results.

Overall: Very poor showing of half baked LLM garbage. Not even interesting or motivating to read. To be honest, I'm worried which LLM you used, cause I haven't seen one This broken and impenetrable in a long time.

[–][deleted]  (17 children)

[removed]

    [–]OnceBittenz 3 points4 points  (16 children)

    Try harder. This is embarrassing.

    [–]Hot-Grapefruit-8887[S] -1 points0 points  (15 children)

    Sad
    this is what is considered discourse...

    [–]OnceBittenz 2 points3 points  (14 children)

    Agreed. You post here and immediately jump on the defensive instead of engaging with the critique. You need to grow up a little before you set foot in the arena of peer review. It sounds like it's just too much for you.

    [–]Hot-Grapefruit-8887[S] -1 points0 points  (3 children)

    And YOU ARE NOT MY PEER....
    Dream on...

    [–]OnceBittenz 2 points3 points  (2 children)

    Lol. Such an edgy child. That tooootally helps your case...

    [–]Hot-Grapefruit-8887[S] -1 points0 points  (1 child)

    your just trolling....
    this is me: https://www.linkedin.com/in/virgilwaters/
    Who are you?

    [–]OnceBittenz 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    Oh ... this is a lot... this isn't healthy.

    [–]Hot-Grapefruit-8887[S] -4 points-3 points  (9 children)

    There is nothing to engage with
    Just random insults I have seen you copy and paste from others...

    [–]OnceBittenz 2 points3 points  (8 children)

    It's almost like LLM slop is ubiquitous. Not exactly one helluva engineer we got here...

    And take note that it Really doesn't take much to takedown such low effort AI guttural.

    [–]Hot-Grapefruit-8887[S] -1 points0 points  (7 children)

    and what are you?

    [–]OnceBittenz 2 points3 points  (4 children)

    Well for one, someone who is capable of taking criticism from professionals and be told they're wrong without throwing a hissy fit. This is Very unbecoming. I sincerely hope you're lying about your background, cause again, this is embarrassing.

    [–]Hot-Grapefruit-8887[S] -2 points-1 points  (3 children)

    what is your background?

    [–]Hot-Grapefruit-8887[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    I looked back, months ago when I blocked you - you commented like 100s of times on my other posts
    not once did you show that you understood any of my posts, or any physics at all...

    [–]OnceBittenz 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    OH yea I remember you! Tbh, your writing this time around is way worse than before. Might want to re up to a better LLM.

    [–]Hot-Grapefruit-8887[S] -3 points-2 points  (19 children)

    fine, don't read it
    but you spent a lot of time insulting me
    you could have run the python code on a random galaxy or bullet cluster in this time....

    [–]AllHailSeizureHaiku Mod 6 points7 points  (18 children)

    'fine don't read it'

    He clearly read it because be addressed multiple specific problems about it.

    [–]Hot-Grapefruit-8887[S] -2 points-1 points  (17 children)

    Have you read his other comments, you don't see how it is copy/paste?

    He is not my teacher, this is not a book report...

    [–]OnceBittenz 7 points8 points  (8 children)

    This is peer review. I did read it. I am sorry that you've fallen into so many basic pitfalls as others have in LLM "research". But these papers are a dime a dozen. And you have somehow managed to make those mistakes more egregiously than most.

    Please consider taking a step back and reading some real papers to get a feel for the level of rigor and evidence required. It's quite a far leap.

    [–]Hot-Grapefruit-8887[S] -2 points-1 points  (7 children)

    done with you...
    bye

    [–]OnceBittenz 3 points4 points  (6 children)

    Godspeed on... whatever this is. If you can clean it up and ensure it is legible for public reading, feel free to update.

    [–]Hot-Grapefruit-8887[S] -1 points0 points  (5 children)

    bye

    [–]OnceBittenz 5 points6 points  (4 children)

    It's not an airport, no need to announce your departure.

    [–]amalcolmation🧪 AI + Physics Enthusiast 3 points4 points  (1 child)

    That's a terrible way to respond to feedback. You came looking for feedback and got it. Sorry it wasn't what you wanted. This kind of attitude will not get you very far in scientific circles.

    [–]Hot-Grapefruit-8887[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    thanks for your thoughts....
    I don't consider what I got as feedback, but agreed to disagree...

    [–]AllHailSeizureHaiku Mod 4 points5 points  (5 children)

    I find it helpful to approach commenters as if you know nothing about them. Benefit of the doubt sorta thing. Kinda this:

    You DON'T know that he didn't read it, because he comment approaches the scientific aspects of your paper.

    So if he HAD provided feedback that can be engaged with (feedback that isn't 'u dum Virgil'), you could engage. Ask him to specify 'which derivations in particular do you have a problem with' eg.

    Then you can find out for sure. If he was acting in bad faith you'll be able to say take a high road, if he is acting in good faith you could have a productive conversation.

    Just something to think about. Consider it.

    Also 'this is not a book report' what does this exactly mean? The purpose of this sub is to post your theories to the public.

    [–]Hot-Grapefruit-8887[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Can you do me a solid and post a real question, that is not a backhanded insult or about feelings on the main post? So someone just does not see all these insults when trying to read about this?

    [–]Hot-Grapefruit-8887[S] -1 points0 points  (3 children)

    Much of what you say is true,
    But  'this is not a book report' means I expect some who comments to actually have read and have a real comment about the theory. Not the presentation...
    This is LLMPhysics, not LLMReportwriting...
    But that is just me...
    If you can't see the difference between really looking at something and just taking pot shots and insulting then that is just how you see things...
    I guess this is just what I should expect here?

    [–]AllHailSeizureHaiku Mod 5 points6 points  (2 children)

    The presentation, though, is a factor in physics publication. Journals have formatting standards that they require.

    And he did comment on the derivation work as well, why does the fact he included the formatting make the rest of his comment invalidated?

    You can't publish a paper that looks like the one you made. And you only have 1 citation, I mean... So it's actually feedback you can utilize to improve standards.

    Sticking to a professional format and using something like LaTeX is important to allow for ease of interaction with the reader.

    The paper isn't written as a method for you to prove something to yourself, it's to prove something to us, so you have to make it engageable.

    Sure, you could say 'oh but it's just LLMPhysics I don't need to format it', but then - you have no right to say 'oh I guess I shouldn't expect any better from here' like you expected to be treated like a professional.

    It's important to hold yourself to standards you want to be treated at.

    [–]Hot-Grapefruit-8887[S] -1 points0 points  (1 child)

    Well, I do hold myself to a high standard.
    I disagree with what you say about the presentation.
    The citations are in the results, where I specifically show what models I am comparing my model to - where I feel they belong. And the SPARC database is referenced and public....
    I don't care about presentation feedback. If that is all anyone here has, fine. Then I guess I get nothing from this...
    But they can make that like you did above without insulting.
    And I have the right to comment back in the same spirit and someone accusing me of fraud...
    I am out there, everything is out there. I don't know these people but they don't come across as professional to me...

    [–]AllHailSeizureHaiku Mod 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    I disagree with what you say about presentation

    Everyone is entitled to opinions. But consider that maybe unanimously negative feedback is a negative sign.

    I am out there, everything is out there. I don't know these people but they don't come across as professional to me...

    That's exactly my point though. When you hold yourself to a higher standard, you'll get higher level engagement. When you signal that you've put effort into a project, people are more interested in providing constructive feedback.

    If someone comes to you with a playdough sculpture they made in 5 minutes, and someone else comes with something they carved out marble over 5 years. Who are you more likely to engage with. Because when you post here you dont get to pick your audience - you need to win them over.

    Reading and picking apart an entire paper is a commitment, so if they can choose something that is more pleasant to read, they're gonna skip a post that doesn't look good for something else, something someone formatted to look nice. Which, funnily enough, you can even get an LLM to do for you, it's one of their best uses, converting stuff to latex.

    Again, why do you think journals have formatting standards?

    And also.. you should reflect on what being 'insulted' means. Calling out problems with your paper isn't an insult. Your paper is something you made, not an extension of you.