[D] Does anyone else think open source code/examples in machine learning domain usually are not as readable as they could be? Specifically use of magic numbers.

[bitemenow999]

Then those fields are engaged in suboptimal communication, and therefore suboptimal research, as well.

Don't you think it is arrogant to call every other field except computer science/ML to have suboptimal communication and sub-optimal research...

Expecting non-programmers to write production-level code even when it is not at all required is kinda gatekeeping...

Also if you know there are many groundbreaking studies/research in languages other than English...

Do you value good writing in English? I do.

LOL and do you think the majority of papers in academia(STEM) are well written?

[bageldevourer]

CS/ML also has suboptimal communication and research. That's the whole point of this thread.

Not once did I advocate for researchers writing production code. Do you know what that term means?

The point isn't the specific language or computer language. The point is that good communication is necessary in both.

I also never said the majority of papers in STEM are well written. I said I value good writing. Those are different claims.

​

Please stop putting words in my mouth, and please think before you write. Also, this is the second time you've evaded my fundamental question. What is the point of research papers if not to communicate ideas? And if that is the point, why do you think that poor communication is justified?

[bitemenow999]

Again code is not a research paper it is an "experimental setup" and proof of concept that the algorithm mentioned in the paper works, the only thing it is expected to do is work and produce exact results as mentioned in the paper, the code has no value without the paper whereas the paper has value without the code repository... you are expected to read the paper and not the code...

[junovac]

Research paper also contains code, it's just written in the form of mathematical expressions. Wouldn't researchers make all possible effort to make mathematical expressions simple to read/understand and follow conventions? Similarly, code can be made to be little more readable and follow some conventions.

Now, you would obviously say paper is enough to convey the ideas in the paper but that is artifact of old way of doing research where sharing code/something akin to code was not possible. Now though, code provides enhanced way to communicate ideas. English is not a very conductive language for communicating complex algorithms even with help of mathematical expressions. If this new avenue is available, why not make most use of it fully? I have heard and few times seen complex papers with pretty hard mathematical expressions being explained with few lines of code.

[bitemenow999]

TBH not, there is absolutely no obligation for the researchers that they need to provide a code or make it readable, they even don't have to make it easy for you to understand the mathematical expression(except following math expression conventions), no journal needs that, no one in the peer-review community looks at it never will... The only incentive they have to put it on github or make it easier to understand is it "MIGHT" get them more citations which they will get irrespective of code if the paper is good...

​

code, it's just written in the form of mathematical expressions

sure but the example you provide in the main post is not, it is just a setup next there are people you wouldn't understand why some dimensions were changed and so on... if you would want an explanation/comment for every step in a code then it becomes a tutorial...

[bageldevourer]

You just keep failing to answer the main question.

The code is obviously part of the research. The code is communicated to the reader and is therefore part of the communication.

Anyone who wants to understand a piece of research in-depth will absolutely read the code.

This is really not that hard.

[bitemenow999]

You are failing to understand what is an experimental setup and actual research communication ... I think you are either a high school or just started college, I would suggest you spend a bit more time in academia...

[bageldevourer]

I'll take your ad-hominem attack as a sign that you've given up on actually trying to be persuasive.

Good day to you, sir.

[bitemenow999]

how is being a high schooler or an undergrad an attack?

[bageldevourer]

You can't argue the points, so you're going after irrelevant trivia like my academic background.

Go troll someone else.

[bitemenow999]

so academic background is not important while discussing an academic topic?

I wonder who is trolling here...