pixcavator

10 ms·

31.
by pixcavator 15y ago
Measuring influence via this eigenvalue method seems to make sense. However, there is ambiguity. First, you have to decide which eigenvalue to pick. Do you choose based on its magnitude? Even when you choose one somehow, what if the dimensi
32.
by pixcavator 15y ago
The article was oulined here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2902684 .
33.
by pixcavator 15y ago
Well, the Calc 1 version isn't good enough because there are several variables here. You have to consider a continuous function defined on the sphere -- to capture all possible orientations of the panel. In fact, it could be a closed sub
34.
by pixcavator 15y ago
>If there is an unqiue optimal orientation for a single static panel (which under realistic assumptions there is)... If you have some kind of “continuous function attains its max” argument here, I think you should elaborate. Because it’
35.
The math of PageRank: more bad news(inperc.com)
2 points by pixcavator 15y ago|0 comments
36.
by pixcavator 15y ago
>>What should be the unique features that will motivate you to join and participate either as a teacher or as a learner. On behalf of all teachers in the world, how about paying them?
37.
by pixcavator 15y ago
Q What is I-Corps? A NSF Innovation Corps (I-Corps) is a public–private partnership that provides grants to determine the technology disposition of concepts developed by previously or currently funded NSF grantees .
38.
by pixcavator 15y ago
>>many a time i have to rely on wikipedia solely. As a more readable alternative, try this http://inperc.com/wiki/index.php?title=Category:Courses .
39.
by pixcavator 15y ago
I wonder how Google would have looked at this idea 10 years ago, or even now: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-4-big-problems-with-googl... .
40.
by pixcavator 15y ago
The problem with how seasonal this is seems exaggerated. Just rename it hwbuff.
41.
by pixcavator 15y ago
I think it might be a good idea to do pairwise comparison instead.
42.
by pixcavator 15y ago
Ok maybe you do know. However, it's odd that you bring up that you work at Google and then add nothing new to the discussion (everybody knows about the 200 metrics). How about: "You're wrong, PageRank has never been the foundation of Goog
43.
by pixcavator 15y ago
Initially it was the foundation and currently let’s just admit that neither of us knows.
44.
by pixcavator 15y ago
You are saying, I think, that we won’t ever need to know π beyond some accuracy. By saying that you, if you are right, are doing good math .
45.
by pixcavator 15y ago
They found time to publish this in 1998 but have been too busy since? I don’t think so. The reason is that they decided to keep all new development secret. That’s why we have to speculate.
46.
by pixcavator 15y ago
Google was successful then with PageRank, but maybe now they need something better? It is my personal opinion but building something as huge (now) as Google search on such a shaky foundation as PageRank is dangerous. I don’t think physical
47.
by pixcavator 15y ago
Is manually penalizing the ranks of spam sites solid engneering too?
48.
PageRank is bad math: discussion(inperc.com)
17 points by pixcavator 15y ago|21 comments
49.
by pixcavator 15y ago
Does this help: f_a (x) = a * x? Is this a function of x in your opinion?
50.
by pixcavator 15y ago
This isn’t really a book but rather lecture notes. That’s what students see as the lectures are being written on a tablet. Usually, what’s said is just as important as what’s written, so it’s not surprising that it may be hard to read if yo
51.
by pixcavator 15y ago
I agree “Then x = y/2” is fine. However, your reasoning why this is OK (“=” is “equal”) is incomplete. Consider “Then the answer = y/2.”, which is grammatically correct but improper.
52.
by pixcavator 15y ago
Actually, TinEye is pretty good at partial matching.
53.
by pixcavator 15y ago
>>PageRank, like almost all machine-learning algorithms, has some knobs which you can tweak to get various results. PageRank is a machine-learning algorithm? "You can tweak" means Google can tweak not the user...
54.
by pixcavator 15y ago
Updated.
55.
PageRank is an abomination (mathematically) -- discussion(reddit.com)
7 points by pixcavator 15y ago|5 comments
56.
PageRank is an abomination (mathematically)(inperc.com)
3 points by pixcavator 15y ago|5 comments
57.
by pixcavator 15y ago
I am more recent in applied math (coming from pure) but my impressions are very similar. For the last few years I keep discovering the same thing over and over again: the level of math in “technology” is abysmal, nobody understands it, nobo
58.
by pixcavator 15y ago
>it's hard to know what to infer when comparing a giant, multicultural country with a small, much more homogeneous one such as Singapore. That's nothing. I remember a few years ago at this forum someone put forward a report that compare
59.
by pixcavator 15y ago
I agree, this is the best way of looking at the issue. However, this approach requires one to learn a more advanced material first. It’s probably inevitable, but it may be a good idea to start with something more elementary. I’d suggest to
60.
by pixcavator 15y ago
Hell with Facebook’s replacements; it’s Google who needs a replacement! (Note: I am currently thinking about possible alternatives for PageRank.)

More ›