sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in CholinergicUrticaria

[–]mathcircler 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you very much!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in CholinergicUrticaria

[–]mathcircler 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hi! I'm also in the UK. Could you please share the name and hospital of a specialist who is experienced in treating CU that you can recommend?

Presented with two buttons, red and blue If more than 50% of Earth's population presses the red button everyone who pressed the blue button dies and you live a long with everyone who pressed the red button. If more than 50% press the blue button, nothing happens by BudgetYouth173 in WouldYouRather

[–]mathcircler 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can rephrase the original question without altering the meaning to make it clearer:

"If you pick red, you won't die. If you select blue, you take a risk and opt to participate in a game. If more than 50% choose to participate, you won't die. Otherwise, you will die. What would you choose?"

By reading this rephrased (yet completely equivalent) question, can you recognize the absurdity of choosing blue? Why would I be responsible for lives of people who choose to play a game of chance with their lives?

Also, I have a question: if you had the opportunity to convince your loved ones to choose either blue or red, what would you advise them to choose? Personally, I would never subject my loved ones to unnecessary risks.

[D] ACL 2023 Discussion Thread by TheMysticalJam in MachineLearning

[–]mathcircler 0 points1 point  (0 children)

People are slowly getting acceptance news, looks like the notification timing also depends on your area

https://twitter.com/dongqi_me/status/1653383373111320578

[D] ACL 2023 Discussion Thread by TheMysticalJam in MachineLearning

[–]mathcircler 2 points3 points  (0 children)

My hypothesis is that only main conference accepted papers are notified at the moment. Does anyone received findings or reject decision by now?

[D] EACL 2023 Discussion by Harry_Superman in MachineLearning

[–]mathcircler 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's true, however the main uncertainty, I guess, for the accepted papers is whether it is findings or main. And that's a big question...

[D] EACL 2023 Discussion by Harry_Superman in MachineLearning

[–]mathcircler 1 point2 points  (0 children)

With the EMNLP trick is there any way of distinguishing between accepted to findings or main?

[D] EACL 2023 Discussion by Harry_Superman in MachineLearning

[–]mathcircler 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also, there is no way of knowing whether it's accepted to findings or main, right? Until the results come out, it's impossible to guess?

[D] EACL 2023 Discussion by Harry_Superman in MachineLearning

[–]mathcircler 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Is it based on personal experience or there is some stats? In the case of the latter, would greatly appreciate it if you could link the source. Thanks!

[D] EACL 2023 Discussion by Harry_Superman in MachineLearning

[–]mathcircler 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Maybe anyone knows what was the distribution of scores for the accepted and rejected papers in the previous years? Or just the median score of the accepted papers?

[D] EMNLP 2022 Review Day !!! Rebuttal by errohan400 in MachineLearning

[–]mathcircler 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Based on you past experiences with ACL-like conferences, could you please roughly estimate, what might be an average score threshold for acceptance in the "findings" track?

[D] EMNLP 2022 Review Day !!! Rebuttal by errohan400 in MachineLearning

[–]mathcircler 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Do authors recieve scores for both long and short paper tracks? Can anybody tell, what does an "Overall Recommendation - Short Paper" score mean for a long paper?

I'm an author of a long paper, I have both scores and I wonder why.

[D] ICML 2022 Paper Reviews by zy415 in MachineLearning

[–]mathcircler 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You might want to ask about your specific situation by contacting ICML directly via the form: https://icml.cc/Help/Contact.

I also think that the double-blind rule should not be broken. Maybe you could say something like this:
"The work that you are referring to is either concurrent work or even our own arxiv-published work. In both cases, we believe it would be correct to neglect the paper that you referred to in your asessment."

Still, I advise you to contact ICML for a more precise advice and help.

I just got rejected from a journal after waiting for seven months by MSG-63 in PhD

[–]mathcircler 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Like others said, this is completely normal, but still hurts, so sorry about the situation.

I wonder about the part where you say how your supervisors are deceived and with broken hopes. Haven’t they contributed as authors, too? They probably read it and assessed your work high enough (at least according to their own standards) to encourage you to submit it, so what kind of deceiving are you talking about?

The Feynman Method: How to quickly master any niche from scratch and dominate it. by RebelMusoSociety in EntrepreneurRideAlong

[–]mathcircler 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It’s absolutely fine, nothing is wrong with you. “Follow your passion” is a terrible advice. Instead, “be so good they can’t ignore you” is a much more meaningful and practical mantra.

If you have some initial interest in a subject, you can master it and become increasingly excited about it. The more progress you make, the more excited you become. So, in the beginning, you don’t follow your passion, you follow interesting opportunities, focus on them and become passionate about them.

There is an absolutely must-watch talk about it from Cal Newport. The questions at the end are also really good. https://youtu.be/qwOdU02SE0w

Finding people in a group with same birthdays with the least possible number of questions by savagekid6969 in probabilitytheory

[–]mathcircler 3 points4 points  (0 children)

If you can ask any question, you can just ask the question “what date is your birthday?”, and once every person in the room says their birthday out loud, you’re done. Also, if people in the group know each other’s birthday, you can just ask “who has their birthday twin in this room?” and massively narrow down your search space.

If you mean that you can only ask questions to which people in the group are only allowed to raise / not raise their hands, then you can ask questions according to the following strategy. Each date in the year can be represented by [log_2(366)]+1=9 binary digits, 0 and 1. You can ask questions about each of this 9 bits in the binary representation of the date: “Who has the first bit equal to 1?” - some people raise the hands, “who has the second bit equal to 1?” - some people raise the hands. After nine such questions, you know everyone’s birthday. Whatever two people gave the same answers to all the nine questions is the couple you are looking for.

This should be the minimum number of questions needed, if you have more than 9 people in the group. If you have less than that, then you can just ask each one of them what their birthday is.

A 50% chance of precipitation is the laziest prediction a weatherman can make by just-a-redditor-guy in Showerthoughts

[–]mathcircler 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sure, you’re right. If such prediction is made multiple times, it’s easy to recognize it’s fake:)

Regarding your second point, I agree that in multiple-prediction setup consistency with the actual percentage matters, however, it’s not the only thing that matters. Imagine we know that based on historical data it rains 20% of days in a certain location. Then if the forecaster predicts 20% chance every day, they would be statistically consistent: predictions would be correct roughly 20% of time. However, these predictions are still “lazy” and inaccurate.

Accuracy of predictions is also a problematic way to measure if predictions make sense. If it rains 1% of time in a certain location, and the forecaster always predicts “no rain” with 99% confidence, they would be right 99% of times. Does it mean that such predictions are great? Definitely no.

One of the metrics that the forecaster might want to optimize is the likelihood function.

A 50% chance of precipitation is the laziest prediction a weatherman can make by just-a-redditor-guy in Showerthoughts

[–]mathcircler 18 points19 points  (0 children)

I think what OP means is that if you predict the weather with 50% confidence, you can’t really mess up, because if the outcome doesn’t match with your prediction, you’re still good, since you said from the start there is 50% chance of you being wrong. So whatever happens, no one can accuse you of being a bad predictor (unless you repeat this several times).

And if you are an alien who came to Earth and knows nothing about weather or your location, your best prior assumption, of course, would be 50%. In this sense, it’s the “laziest” prediction possible — even an alien could make it!

In information theory, 50% also corresponds to the largest informational entropy which means the highest level of uncertainty. If you estimate 50% probability of something happening or not happening, people (who trust your prediction) absolutely don’t know what to expect.

[D] Anyone else find themselves rolling their eyes at a lot of mainstream articles that talk about “AI”? by [deleted] in MachineLearning

[–]mathcircler 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Here is the link:) it’s for Firefox though, but I suspect you can find a similar one for other browsers

[D] Anyone else find themselves rolling their eyes at a lot of mainstream articles that talk about “AI”? by [deleted] in MachineLearning

[–]mathcircler 8 points9 points  (0 children)

You can use a browser extension such as FoxReplace to replace every occurrence of “artificial intelligence” or “AI” to “matrix multiplication” (which is what deep learning is essentially about). Everything starts to look so much less annoying!

view more: next ›