jeff76

5 ms·

1.
by jeff76 8y ago
The way you were arguing makes it sound like you are against beginners having access to solutions, or that you completely misunderstood my initial argument. I am not arguing about anything other than that. If you want to address that in par
2.
by jeff76 8y ago
Think you missed my entire point of including solutions for the beginner, i.e., someone that lacks math maturity and the reasoning of how easily such a person could fool themselves into thinking their thought process is valid.
3.
by jeff76 8y ago
Yes, which is why you include "several proofs of this could include..."
4.
by jeff76 8y ago
Disagree. Some proofs are very straightforward and standard. Those are easily checkable with a solution guide.
5.
by jeff76 8y ago
The issue isn’t just that the person can’t write a valid proof, but that the person thinks they have a valid proof, but it is actually invalid and they don’t have feedback to know it.
6.
by jeff76 8y ago
When you’re doing basic proofs, showing solutions are often simple enough for unconfused verification. There are often standard ways to go about proofs, solutions could provide those standard solutions with sufficient detail written out.
7.
by jeff76 8y ago
The point isn’t we need to do formal verification to test correctness. It’s that you probably wouldn’t write a program first pass and assume it is but free. So, why would you assume beginners that don’t know how to write proofs would write
8.
by jeff76 8y ago
I disagree with the notion that if you question your solution then your solution isn’t correct. A beginner could easily fool herself onto thinking she has correct understanding, but actually her proof is buggy. Without feedback, she wouldn’
9.
by jeff76 8y ago
Any books in: Introduction to proofs, Abstract algebra, Topology, Linear algebra
10.
by jeff76 8y ago
I understand but sometimes there are books targeted for the “self-learner” that provide 0 solutions and are the type of books that save off major theorems to be proven in the exercises. That’s completely fine. Don’t advertise the books for
11.
by jeff76 8y ago
I don’t understand why people recommend books like “a programmers introduction to mathematics”. They’re advertised as books for “programmers” or people that know little math, yet they hide solutions from the reader. The reader that doesn’t
12.
by jeff76 8y ago
Any books on how to do proofs, that also includes solutions?
13.
Ask HN: What are Type Theory beginner resources?
3 points by jeff76 8y ago|0 comments
14.
by jeff76 8y ago
This answer makes sense. I suppose my question is more along the lines of, if someone is specializing in deep learning in a PhD program then shouldn’t they at the very least be able to implement models and also know optimization tricks? In
15.
by jeff76 8y ago
Great reply. My question based on this comment, >My advice is assuming you’d like to be a person that trains/deploys ML models to solve problems in industry. This is much different than an ML Engineer, who’s implementing algorithms
16.
by jeff76 8y ago
This is interesting. What are the prerequisites to understand Univalent Foundations and how active is it?
17.
by jeff76 8y ago
This brings up a question I have. Is there a way we can code up proofs in a computer language and have it checked for correctness? If so, how? What resources can I follow up on? Can current technologies check really complicated proofs like