Yeah after looking through the PDF, I'm still wondering what they meant. Here are some conjectures: - The book has a high bias (since written from physics pers

Yeah after looking through the PDF, I'm still wondering what they meant. Here are some conjectures: - The book has a high bias (since written from physics perspective), but low variance since assuming physics background allows authors to write a very focussed narrative that works for physicists (low variance on subset of physisicts readers). - If we define the problem of choosing which topics t1, t2, ..., tn to cover in a ML book, the authors are saying the using the physicists approach will lead to consistency good results (i.e. not all over the place). It something like an argument from physicists-are-sensible people, unlike CS theoreticians, industry practicians, and mathematicians.