3 ms·
Novelty is in the job description though. I think the problem, especially in AI/ML is the obsession with "State of the Art" algorithms. This can be gamed by mak
by unishark 5y ago
Novelty is in the job description though. I think the problem, especially in AI/ML is the obsession with "State of the Art" algorithms. This can be gamed by making claims with numerical "experiments". If an idea had to stand on its own, and be interesting even if it may not make a better pattern-recognition product, most of them probably wouldn't make it. Indeed that's essentially the requirements presented by reviewers and editors: "prove we should read about this otherwise-uninteresting method by giving numerical test results where it wins".
- bumby 5y agoI’m not stating novelty isn’t be part of the aim of research, I just think we need to be aware of the perverse incentives it creates when it becomes the sole underlying criteria by which merit is judged. I think there’s room for expanding the definition of what is good research to include replication of prior art because the field in general will be better off for it. I imagine novel research would still be more prized but it wouldn’t relegate replication to being considered a waste of time.