4 ms·
This is the kind of theory-free science seems to permeate the entire field of ML lately. I can only see this as a negative, what's the use of automatically gen
by ergl 2y ago
This is the kind of theory-free science seems to permeate the entire field of ML lately.
I can only see this as a negative, what's the use of automatically generated papers if not to flood the already over-strained volunteers that review papers at conferences? (mostly already-overworked PhD students.) If I wanted a glorified chatbot to spam me with made-up improvements, I'd ask it myself.
- jalman 2y agoAny theory compresses experimental data (a mountain of data) into a palatable bit (pocketable item) of knowledge. One can go without theory just by stacking the original measured ratios dA -> dB. The Solutions, that are generated upon raw data, would likely produce less waste, as they fit the exact phenomena. Generalizations do emphasize the main effects and level out the minor effects, introducing an error. The value of AI-mated research is results. This tool will aid engineering. It will offer a pinpointed research to resolve a particular issue at hand. The research will not be published. It will remain a trade secret. What you are complaining about is a brocken labor division. Let's consider a case. An engineering department has a problem. It passes the problem to the research department. The research department slacks out, while produces junk. It makes tons of papers that are hard to prove, not to say apply. They drink champagne with other researchers, so they can publish the junk and defend the turf. AI-mated research will finish the racket and corruption. A "$15-scientist" will kill the no-output individuals, who are just a sophisticated flavor of bureaucracy. A science bureaucrat is a bureaucrat with elevated rights and virtually no responsibility.