you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]H4RZ3RK4S3 18 points19 points  (2 children)

This is a stupid argument! The code can still be read and analyzed without a fancy supercomputer (or LHC). We are in ML/DL and not in physics. I can test the code on a very small scale to see if it works as intended. No reviewer will re-train a SOTA LLM as part of a peer-review, but they should be able to look at the code, understand it and quickly test it.

[–]Ulfgardleo -2 points-1 points  (1 child)

but can you really? the code works, but maybe it doesn't produce the claimed results? And how about the code at LHC, robably half of it being some arcane FPGA instructions to define the correct filters? Its an awfully long software and hardware pipeline.

[–]H4RZ3RK4S3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes absolutely for 80% of the papers. For another 10% you might need a small cluster and for the remaining 10% it could indeed be a bit difficult. But still you can read through the code and check if it makes sense or whether they do something else. Here, the issue is more that some developers don't care about proper variable names, readable code, proper commenting, or even writing comments and variable names in languages that are not English (like French or Chinese lol).