Celmeno
Celmeno t1_j0qh32a wrote
Reply to comment by lolillini in [R] Getting arXiv article published. Endorsement needed, cs. by No-Stay9943
The vast majority of good papers (95+%) will be properly published after a while. This has been thee reality for decades.
Not every paper there will be good. There are mediocre conferences with amazing papers. There are top conferences with questionable papers. Regardless, the tendency is still clear.
I will gladly give OP feedback. But to state that publishing is not the primary way to get research out is just disingenuous
Celmeno t1_j0qaw0s wrote
Reply to comment by 7366241494 in [R] Getting arXiv article published. Endorsement needed, cs. by No-Stay9943
You seem to have no idea about the scientific process. But that's okay. Not everyone has to know everything. I did not argue against putting it out there available to all. All my papers are publicly available via my university and most are on arxiv as well. I was just stating the opinion that writing a good paper for it to never be read is not worth the effort.
Celmeno t1_j0pocem wrote
Reply to comment by anymorenevermore in [R] Getting arXiv article published. Endorsement needed, cs. by No-Stay9943
Where did I imply I was gatekeeping? I was just stating that I don't think it is worth the effort to write a paper if it will stay on arxiv
Celmeno t1_j0p73ax wrote
Why do you want to put it on arxiv if you dont do research as a job? What journal/conference do you plan to submit to? (If you don't then imho arxiving it is not worth it). If your article is good I might be able to help you
edit: I was not arguing for keeping good research behind a paywall. Public money, public code and open science are issues I very much support (e.g. by publicly available post prints of my own work and open soruce code). I do, however, think that writing a good paper is a lot of work and from someone unknown I very much doubt this will gain any traction just being arxived even if it is good
Celmeno t1_izzjny6 wrote
Reply to comment by captain_arroganto in [D] G. Hinton proposes FF – an alternative to Backprop by mrx-ai
https://doi.org/10.1016%2FS0893-6080%2897%2900011-7 is the key paper to start on
Celmeno t1_izn2tmq wrote
Reply to comment by junetwentyfirst2020 in [D] Making a regression NN estimate its own regression error by Alex-S-S
The one book everyone practitioner of machine learning should have read: Bishop "Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning"
Celmeno t1_izlxq9o wrote
What you want is a bayesian estimator. It gives you a probability distribution over all possible regression values (where the mode/expected value is the equivalent of the point estimate you are used to). The smaller the distribution the higher its estimated accuracy. You basicly get the value and its expected error all in one. No problem coding this into a neural network.
Celmeno t1_je9o7z6 wrote
Reply to [D] What do you think about all this hype for ChatGPT? by Dear-Vehicle-3215
ChatGPT is a tool. GPT-5 might be the end of humanity. We do not have done enough alignment.