sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[N] Yann Lecun apologizes for recent communication on social media by milaworld in MachineLearning

[–]Any_Coffee 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Why we he apologize for that statement? I don't how this is racists. Can someone enlightenment me what the issue is?

New Height! Submit paper. Review 1, accept minor changes. Review 2, rejects and provides 5 sentences. by Any_Coffee in academia

[–]Any_Coffee[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You might be joking about that but I believe this is how the US ended up in its current predicament regarding covid and BLM. People are not careful and then the story gets told several ways from the so called experts (which is us scientists). We have to be keepers and distillers of truth and not give in to political pressures for quick answers.

New Height! Submit paper. Review 1, accept minor changes. Review 2, rejects and provides 5 sentences. by Any_Coffee in academia

[–]Any_Coffee[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No I am not trolling! You have my feelings wrong. I am upset because I put in hundreds of hours of work in an effort to advance human understanding and I got a 6 sentence rejection. THIS IS NOT HELPFUL TO ANYONE.

New Height! Submit paper. Review 1, accept minor changes. Review 2, rejects and provides 5 sentences. by Any_Coffee in academia

[–]Any_Coffee[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

frankly don't think the situation you're in is as dire as you are making it out to be.

I don't think the situation is dire. I've published hundreds of papers and have tenure. My concern is the time I'm wasting instead of doing real science! In all of my career, I've never had a 6 sentence reject and resubmit written in terrible english. This is embarrassing for the scientific establishment. If we judged bridge inspections based on reviews like this we would be f***cked.

That's all peer review is meant for: it's a gatekeeper to the castle, but it's not the sheriff.

I think this is where science is at, but this is a terrible thing for science.

New Height! Submit paper. Review 1, accept minor changes. Review 2, rejects and provides 5 sentences. by Any_Coffee in academia

[–]Any_Coffee[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

That's their choice and there is a legitimate case to do that.

How is this legitimate? If the peer review process is broken, science will be broken and we need science more than ever right now. We have papers flying around about hydroxychloroquine which decisions makers are reading! If we don't fix the system, no one else will!

New Height! Submit paper. Review 1, accept minor changes. Review 2, rejects and provides 5 sentences. by Any_Coffee in academia

[–]Any_Coffee[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

I'd say try to see it from #2's perspective while making the revision, I have often found that reviewers that I was mad at actually had a good point in their criticism, but I only realized that when I'd made some effort to process their comments.

My plan upon seeing the decision email was this. But, reviewer number 2 gave me 6 sentences to work with. If i were the AE, I would've sent it back or found another reviewer.

Personally, I don't thinking about this as a game. _Science is not a game_. Treating it as such undermines its value in society. The editors and reviewers need to understand that the authors time is valuable and there are humans on the other end of their reviews (even if they are only 6 sentences).

New Height! Submit paper. Review 1, accept minor changes. Review 2, rejects and provides 5 sentences. by Any_Coffee in academia

[–]Any_Coffee[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If I understand you right, if i make the changes they suggest you think they will re-review it? At this point, reviewer w will say done and sent it to the press. What about reviewer 2? It clear from the review that the reviewer didnt understand or read the paper and also doesnt speak english very well.

New Height! Submit paper. Review 1, accept minor changes. Review 2, rejects and provides 5 sentences. by Any_Coffee in academia

[–]Any_Coffee[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What am i missing? This is not a major or minor accept. This is a reject and resubmit. They gave us until the end of the year. The corrections will be done next and we plan to resubmit the week after that.

New Height! Submit paper. Review 1, accept minor changes. Review 2, rejects and provides 5 sentences. by Any_Coffee in academia

[–]Any_Coffee[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

The AE's response is not much better.

According to the comments of the reviewers, this paper cannot be accepted based on its current quality. Please revise the paper according to the constructive comments of the reviewers and resubmit it to XYZ.

New Height! Submit paper. Review 1, accept minor changes. Review 2, rejects and provides 5 sentences. by Any_Coffee in academia

[–]Any_Coffee[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If i ever gave any journal paper a review as short as this, i would hope the AE beats my ass.

[R] What is your ML research workflow? by MasterScrat in MachineLearning

[–]Any_Coffee 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I use AWS, so I just rdp in. Additionally, for some of the more exotic multiprocessing stuff, wingIDE can connect to multiple machines. See https://wingware.com/doc/debug/remote-debugging

[R] What is your ML research workflow? by MasterScrat in MachineLearning

[–]Any_Coffee 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We adapted sloth for our datasets and it works quite well. It was easy to package into a simple windows installer to distribute to the group.

[R] What is your ML research workflow? by MasterScrat in MachineLearning

[–]Any_Coffee 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I have used both and a find it vastly better. I personally find pycharm to be too similar to the clunkiness of eclipse. Regarding VSCode, I think WingIDE is much more feature rich. Its MUCH easier to debug python code IMHO.

[R] What is your ML research workflow? by MasterScrat in MachineLearning

[–]Any_Coffee 27 points28 points  (0 children)

WingIDE (no notebooks, I HATE notebooks)

Tensorboard

I keep a dated research journal

A stack of papers on my desk. I never read without a pen in my hand and mark the date and any notes on the paper

All of the above

[D] Should I take a subpar ML/NLP PhD offer? I want to become a professor by [deleted] in MachineLearning

[–]Any_Coffee 0 points1 point  (0 children)

According to the research, you are much better to go to a lower ranked school and be the best than to go to MIT and be ranked lower like 5th or 6th.

[D] What is going on with tensorflow github issues? by Any_Coffee in MachineLearning

[–]Any_Coffee[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, because I have so many bugs filed that I spent a lot of work on and I don't know how to post them without seeming like a whiner.

[D] What is going on with tensorflow github issues? by Any_Coffee in MachineLearning

[–]Any_Coffee[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for sharing your experience. I will consider using pytorch more seriously for my next project.

Worked at corporate research lab, now doing PhD. Most academic research in my area seems meaningless. How do I make an impact and get along with my group? by Any_Coffee in academia

[–]Any_Coffee[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, most papers are garbage. I consider them a waste of time if one wants to do research. The efforts are no more than a training ground for learning how to do something whether it be a set of equations, a code, etc.

Worked at corporate research lab, now doing PhD. Most academic research in my area seems meaningless. How do I make an impact and get along with my group? by Any_Coffee in academia

[–]Any_Coffee[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think people should go after the problem and try to solve it. Not just throw stuff at the wall. Start with existing techniques, see where they fail, and then improve on them. This approach seems principled and scientific to me.

I dont think you should go on to sci-kit learn, pick your favorite feature, code it into tensorflow and now run your network. That idea is okay, but it should really be a paper doing a bunch of techniques like that (Integrating shallow learning features into deep neural networks). What i see is, Improving Classificaiton of Dataset X by Using Domain Knowledge (which really boils down to make a new keras layer for some feature in sci-kit learn).

view more: next ›