hunch_net hunch_net-2005 hunch_net-2005-106 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: I found the article on “ Political Science ” at the New York Times interesting. Essentially the article is about allegations that the US government has been systematically distorting scientific views. With a petition by some 7000+ scientists alleging such behavior this is clearly a significant concern. One thing not mentioned explicitly in this discussion is that there are fundamental cultural differences between academic research and the rest of the world. In academic research, careful, clear thought is valued. This value is achieved by both formal and informal mechanisms. One example of a formal mechanism is peer review. In contrast, in the land of politics, the basic value is agreement. It is only with some amount of agreement that a new law can be passed or other actions can be taken. Since Science (with a capitol ‘S’) has accomplished many things, it can be a significant tool in persuading people. This makes it compelling for a politician to use science as a mec
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 Essentially the article is about allegations that the US government has been systematically distorting scientific views. [sent-2, score-0.367]
2 With a petition by some 7000+ scientists alleging such behavior this is clearly a significant concern. [sent-3, score-0.533]
3 One thing not mentioned explicitly in this discussion is that there are fundamental cultural differences between academic research and the rest of the world. [sent-4, score-0.451]
4 In academic research, careful, clear thought is valued. [sent-5, score-0.273]
5 This value is achieved by both formal and informal mechanisms. [sent-6, score-0.307]
6 One example of a formal mechanism is peer review. [sent-7, score-0.3]
7 It is only with some amount of agreement that a new law can be passed or other actions can be taken. [sent-9, score-0.367]
8 This makes it compelling for a politician to use science as a mechanism for pushing agreement on their viewpoint. [sent-11, score-0.58]
9 Most scientists would not mind if their research is used in a public debate. [sent-12, score-0.416]
10 The difficulty arises when the use of science is not representative of the beliefs of scientists. [sent-13, score-0.307]
11 For example, agreement is uncommon in research which implies that it is almost always possible, by carefully picking and choosing, to find one scientist who supports almost any viewpoint. [sent-15, score-0.34]
12 Such misrepresentations of scientific beliefs about the world violate the fundamental value of “careful, clear thought”, so they are regarded as fundamentally dangerous to the process of research. [sent-16, score-0.913]
13 Naturally, fundamentally dangerous things are sensitive issues which can easily lead to large petitions. [sent-17, score-0.241]
14 One response has been (as the article title suggests) politicization of science and scientists. [sent-20, score-0.349]
15 As another example, anecdotal evidence suggests a strong majority of scientists in the US voted against Bush in the last presidential election. [sent-22, score-0.431]
16 I would prefer a different approach, which is essentially a separation of responsibilities. [sent-23, score-0.255]
17 Given a sufficient separation of powers, scientists should be the most reliable source for describing and predicting the outcomes of some courses of action and the impact of new technologies. [sent-24, score-0.817]
18 Supreme court judges (who specialize in interpretation of law) are, by design, relatively unaffectable by the rest of politics. [sent-27, score-0.293]
19 A newer example is the federal reserve board who have been relatively unaffected by changes in politics, even though it is easy to imagine their powers could dramatically effect election outcomes. [sent-28, score-0.873]
20 Neither of the above examples are perfect—the separation of powers has failed on multiple occasions. [sent-30, score-0.638]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('scientists', 0.341), ('powers', 0.315), ('separation', 0.255), ('petition', 0.192), ('agreement', 0.186), ('science', 0.18), ('article', 0.169), ('politics', 0.149), ('dangerous', 0.142), ('pushing', 0.142), ('rest', 0.14), ('formal', 0.131), ('beliefs', 0.127), ('scientific', 0.124), ('law', 0.11), ('careful', 0.108), ('clear', 0.107), ('fundamentally', 0.099), ('example', 0.097), ('academic', 0.095), ('value', 0.091), ('suggests', 0.09), ('informal', 0.085), ('reserve', 0.085), ('specialize', 0.085), ('union', 0.085), ('scientist', 0.079), ('regarded', 0.079), ('federal', 0.079), ('board', 0.079), ('courses', 0.079), ('custom', 0.079), ('election', 0.079), ('research', 0.075), ('systematically', 0.074), ('accomplished', 0.074), ('mismatched', 0.074), ('outcomes', 0.074), ('fundamental', 0.073), ('mechanism', 0.072), ('concerned', 0.071), ('political', 0.071), ('dramatically', 0.071), ('passed', 0.071), ('violate', 0.071), ('thought', 0.071), ('relatively', 0.068), ('cultural', 0.068), ('describing', 0.068), ('failed', 0.068)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.99999988 106 hunch net-2005-09-04-Science in the Government
Introduction: I found the article on “ Political Science ” at the New York Times interesting. Essentially the article is about allegations that the US government has been systematically distorting scientific views. With a petition by some 7000+ scientists alleging such behavior this is clearly a significant concern. One thing not mentioned explicitly in this discussion is that there are fundamental cultural differences between academic research and the rest of the world. In academic research, careful, clear thought is valued. This value is achieved by both formal and informal mechanisms. One example of a formal mechanism is peer review. In contrast, in the land of politics, the basic value is agreement. It is only with some amount of agreement that a new law can be passed or other actions can be taken. Since Science (with a capitol ‘S’) has accomplished many things, it can be a significant tool in persuading people. This makes it compelling for a politician to use science as a mec
2 0.13310368 282 hunch net-2008-01-06-Research Political Issues
Introduction: I’ve avoided discussing politics here, although not for lack of interest. The problem with discussing politics is that it’s customary for people to say much based upon little information. Nevertheless, politics can have a substantial impact on science (and we might hope for the vice-versa). It’s primary election time in the United States, so the topic is timely, although the issues are not. There are several policy decisions which substantially effect development of science and technology in the US. Education The US has great contrasts in education. The top universities are very good places, yet the grade school education system produces mediocre results. For me, the contrast between a public education and Caltech was bracing. For many others attending Caltech, it clearly was not. Upgrading the k-12 education system in the US is a long-standing chronic problem which I know relatively little about. My own experience is that a basic attitude of “no child unrealized” i
3 0.10775023 193 hunch net-2006-07-09-The Stock Prediction Machine Learning Problem
Introduction: …is discussed in this nytimes article . I generally expect such approaches to become more common since computers are getting faster, machine learning is getting better, and data is becoming more plentiful. This is another example where machine learning technology may have a huge economic impact. Some side notes: We-in-research know almost nothing about how these things are done (because it is typically a corporate secret). … but the limited discussion in the article seem naive from a machine learning viewpoint. The learning process used apparently often fails to take into account transaction costs. What little of the approaches is discussed appears modeling based. It seems plausible that more direct prediction methods can yield an edge. One difficulty with stock picking as a research topic is that it is inherently a zero sum game (for every winner, there is a loser). Much of the rest of research is positive sum (basically, everyone wins).
4 0.10765611 110 hunch net-2005-09-10-“Failure” is an option
Introduction: This is about the hard choices that graduate students must make. The cultural definition of success in academic research is to: Produce good research which many other people appreciate. Produce many students who go on to do the same. There are fundamental reasons why this is success in the local culture. Good research appreciated by others means access to jobs. Many students succesful in the same way implies that there are a number of people who think in a similar way and appreciate your work. In order to graduate, a phd student must live in an academic culture for a period of several years. It is common to adopt the culture’s definition of success during this time. It’s also common for many phd students discover they are not suited to an academic research lifestyle. This collision of values and abilities naturally results in depression. The most fundamental advice when this happens is: change something. Pick a new advisor. Pick a new research topic. Or leave th
5 0.1070298 134 hunch net-2005-12-01-The Webscience Future
Introduction: The internet has significantly effected the way we do research but it’s capabilities have not yet been fully realized. First, let’s acknowledge some known effects. Self-publishing By default, all researchers in machine learning (and more generally computer science and physics) place their papers online for anyone to download. The exact mechanism differs—physicists tend to use a central repository ( Arxiv ) while computer scientists tend to place the papers on their webpage. Arxiv has been slowly growing in subject breadth so it now sometimes used by computer scientists. Collaboration Email has enabled working remotely with coauthors. This has allowed collaborationis which would not otherwise have been possible and generally speeds research. Now, let’s look at attempts to go further. Blogs (like this one) allow public discussion about topics which are not easily categorized as “a new idea in machine learning” (like this topic). Organization of some subfield
6 0.097778052 51 hunch net-2005-04-01-The Producer-Consumer Model of Research
7 0.096954957 146 hunch net-2006-01-06-MLTV
8 0.089364521 485 hunch net-2013-06-29-The Benefits of Double-Blind Review
9 0.088304386 132 hunch net-2005-11-26-The Design of an Optimal Research Environment
10 0.086251363 277 hunch net-2007-12-12-Workshop Summary—Principles of Learning Problem Design
11 0.085339248 115 hunch net-2005-09-26-Prediction Bounds as the Mathematics of Science
12 0.084549159 353 hunch net-2009-05-08-Computability in Artificial Intelligence
13 0.084428407 296 hunch net-2008-04-21-The Science 2.0 article
14 0.084184438 64 hunch net-2005-04-28-Science Fiction and Research
15 0.078292057 345 hunch net-2009-03-08-Prediction Science
16 0.078145996 36 hunch net-2005-03-05-Funding Research
17 0.077647649 333 hunch net-2008-12-27-Adversarial Academia
18 0.07741493 464 hunch net-2012-05-03-Microsoft Research, New York City
19 0.077044271 48 hunch net-2005-03-29-Academic Mechanism Design
20 0.076775856 112 hunch net-2005-09-14-The Predictionist Viewpoint
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.173), (1, -0.01), (2, -0.058), (3, 0.104), (4, -0.083), (5, -0.019), (6, 0.019), (7, 0.077), (8, -0.022), (9, 0.017), (10, 0.051), (11, 0.003), (12, 0.02), (13, -0.034), (14, -0.032), (15, 0.012), (16, -0.05), (17, 0.042), (18, 0.031), (19, 0.044), (20, -0.022), (21, -0.07), (22, -0.025), (23, 0.058), (24, -0.037), (25, -0.055), (26, 0.034), (27, 0.093), (28, 0.073), (29, 0.015), (30, -0.067), (31, 0.076), (32, -0.017), (33, -0.004), (34, -0.014), (35, 0.029), (36, -0.055), (37, 0.061), (38, -0.039), (39, 0.029), (40, 0.013), (41, 0.03), (42, 0.009), (43, -0.007), (44, -0.036), (45, 0.037), (46, -0.017), (47, 0.006), (48, -0.006), (49, 0.024)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.96416837 106 hunch net-2005-09-04-Science in the Government
Introduction: I found the article on “ Political Science ” at the New York Times interesting. Essentially the article is about allegations that the US government has been systematically distorting scientific views. With a petition by some 7000+ scientists alleging such behavior this is clearly a significant concern. One thing not mentioned explicitly in this discussion is that there are fundamental cultural differences between academic research and the rest of the world. In academic research, careful, clear thought is valued. This value is achieved by both formal and informal mechanisms. One example of a formal mechanism is peer review. In contrast, in the land of politics, the basic value is agreement. It is only with some amount of agreement that a new law can be passed or other actions can be taken. Since Science (with a capitol ‘S’) has accomplished many things, it can be a significant tool in persuading people. This makes it compelling for a politician to use science as a mec
2 0.74368048 282 hunch net-2008-01-06-Research Political Issues
Introduction: I’ve avoided discussing politics here, although not for lack of interest. The problem with discussing politics is that it’s customary for people to say much based upon little information. Nevertheless, politics can have a substantial impact on science (and we might hope for the vice-versa). It’s primary election time in the United States, so the topic is timely, although the issues are not. There are several policy decisions which substantially effect development of science and technology in the US. Education The US has great contrasts in education. The top universities are very good places, yet the grade school education system produces mediocre results. For me, the contrast between a public education and Caltech was bracing. For many others attending Caltech, it clearly was not. Upgrading the k-12 education system in the US is a long-standing chronic problem which I know relatively little about. My own experience is that a basic attitude of “no child unrealized” i
3 0.69397318 64 hunch net-2005-04-28-Science Fiction and Research
Introduction: A big part of doing research is imagining how things could be different, and then trying to figure out how to get there. A big part of science fiction is imagining how things could be different, and then working through the implications. Because of the similarity here, reading science fiction can sometimes be helpful in understanding and doing research. (And, hey, it’s fun.) Here’s some list of science fiction books I enjoyed which seem particularly relevant to computer science and (sometimes) learning systems: Vernor Vinge, “True Names”, “A Fire Upon the Deep” Marc Stiegler, “David’s Sling”, “Earthweb” Charles Stross, “Singularity Sky” Greg Egan, “Diaspora” Joe Haldeman, “Forever Peace” (There are surely many others.) Incidentally, the nature of science fiction itself has changed. Decades ago, science fiction projected great increases in the power humans control (example: E.E. Smith Lensman series). That didn’t really happen in the last 50 years. Inste
4 0.66528964 112 hunch net-2005-09-14-The Predictionist Viewpoint
Introduction: Virtually every discipline of significant human endeavor has a way explaining itself as fundamental and important. In all the cases I know of, they are both right (they are vital) and wrong (they are not solely vital). Politics. This is the one that everyone is familiar with at the moment. “What could be more important than the process of making decisions?” Science and Technology. This is the one that we-the-academics are familiar with. “The loss of modern science and technology would be catastrophic.” Military. “Without the military, a nation will be invaded and destroyed.” (insert your favorite here) Within science and technology, the same thing happens again. Mathematics. “What could be more important than a precise language for establishing truths?” Physics. “Nothing is more fundamental than the laws which govern the universe. Understanding them is the key to understanding everything else.” Biology. “Without life, we wouldn’t be here, so clearly the s
5 0.66228086 193 hunch net-2006-07-09-The Stock Prediction Machine Learning Problem
Introduction: …is discussed in this nytimes article . I generally expect such approaches to become more common since computers are getting faster, machine learning is getting better, and data is becoming more plentiful. This is another example where machine learning technology may have a huge economic impact. Some side notes: We-in-research know almost nothing about how these things are done (because it is typically a corporate secret). … but the limited discussion in the article seem naive from a machine learning viewpoint. The learning process used apparently often fails to take into account transaction costs. What little of the approaches is discussed appears modeling based. It seems plausible that more direct prediction methods can yield an edge. One difficulty with stock picking as a research topic is that it is inherently a zero sum game (for every winner, there is a loser). Much of the rest of research is positive sum (basically, everyone wins).
6 0.64934945 241 hunch net-2007-04-28-The Coming Patent Apocalypse
7 0.63134503 48 hunch net-2005-03-29-Academic Mechanism Design
8 0.62711132 296 hunch net-2008-04-21-The Science 2.0 article
9 0.62045205 366 hunch net-2009-08-03-Carbon in Computer Science Research
10 0.61435032 411 hunch net-2010-09-21-Regretting the dead
11 0.59850866 50 hunch net-2005-04-01-Basic computer science research takes a hit
12 0.58364844 134 hunch net-2005-12-01-The Webscience Future
13 0.57346481 397 hunch net-2010-05-02-What’s the difference between gambling and rewarding good prediction?
14 0.57177097 344 hunch net-2009-02-22-Effective Research Funding
15 0.55964452 314 hunch net-2008-08-24-Mass Customized Medicine in the Future?
16 0.55357039 449 hunch net-2011-11-26-Giving Thanks
17 0.54436135 1 hunch net-2005-01-19-Why I decided to run a weblog.
18 0.54284519 132 hunch net-2005-11-26-The Design of an Optimal Research Environment
19 0.54110271 335 hunch net-2009-01-08-Predictive Analytics World
20 0.54040527 358 hunch net-2009-06-01-Multitask Poisoning
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.028), (16, 0.016), (27, 0.182), (38, 0.049), (42, 0.025), (53, 0.077), (55, 0.116), (61, 0.308), (94, 0.088), (95, 0.018)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.87778592 106 hunch net-2005-09-04-Science in the Government
Introduction: I found the article on “ Political Science ” at the New York Times interesting. Essentially the article is about allegations that the US government has been systematically distorting scientific views. With a petition by some 7000+ scientists alleging such behavior this is clearly a significant concern. One thing not mentioned explicitly in this discussion is that there are fundamental cultural differences between academic research and the rest of the world. In academic research, careful, clear thought is valued. This value is achieved by both formal and informal mechanisms. One example of a formal mechanism is peer review. In contrast, in the land of politics, the basic value is agreement. It is only with some amount of agreement that a new law can be passed or other actions can be taken. Since Science (with a capitol ‘S’) has accomplished many things, it can be a significant tool in persuading people. This makes it compelling for a politician to use science as a mec
2 0.83965158 412 hunch net-2010-09-28-Machined Learnings
Introduction: Paul Mineiro has started Machined Learnings where he’s seriously attempting to do ML research in public. I personally need to read through in greater detail, as much of it is learning reduction related, trying to deal with the sorts of complex source problems that come up in practice.
3 0.82693934 416 hunch net-2010-10-29-To Vidoelecture or not
Introduction: (update: cross-posted on CACM ) For the first time in several years, ICML 2010 did not have videolectures attending. Luckily, the tutorial on exploration and learning which Alina and I put together can be viewed , since we also presented at KDD 2010 , which included videolecture support. ICML didn’t cover the cost of a videolecture, because PASCAL didn’t provide a grant for it this year. On the other hand, KDD covered it out of registration costs. The cost of videolectures isn’t cheap. For a workshop the baseline quote we have is 270 euro per hour, plus a similar cost for the cameraman’s travel and accomodation. This can be reduced substantially by having a volunteer with a camera handle the cameraman duties, uploading the video and slides to be processed for a quoted 216 euro per hour. Youtube is the most predominant free video site with a cost of $0, but it turns out to be a poor alternative. 15 minute upload limits do not match typical talk lengths.
4 0.70392621 201 hunch net-2006-08-07-The Call of the Deep
Introduction: Many learning algorithms used in practice are fairly simple. Viewed representationally, many prediction algorithms either compute a linear separator of basic features (perceptron, winnow, weighted majority, SVM) or perhaps a linear separator of slightly more complex features (2-layer neural networks or kernelized SVMs). Should we go beyond this, and start using “deep” representations? What is deep learning? Intuitively, deep learning is about learning to predict in ways which can involve complex dependencies between the input (observed) features. Specifying this more rigorously turns out to be rather difficult. Consider the following cases: SVM with Gaussian Kernel. This is not considered deep learning, because an SVM with a gaussian kernel can’t succinctly represent certain decision surfaces. One of Yann LeCun ‘s examples is recognizing objects based on pixel values. An SVM will need a new support vector for each significantly different background. Since the number
5 0.61261696 437 hunch net-2011-07-10-ICML 2011 and the future
Introduction: Unfortunately, I ended up sick for much of this ICML. I did manage to catch one interesting paper: Richard Socher , Cliff Lin , Andrew Y. Ng , and Christopher D. Manning Parsing Natural Scenes and Natural Language with Recursive Neural Networks . I invited Richard to share his list of interesting papers, so hopefully we’ll hear from him soon. In the meantime, Paul and Hal have posted some lists. the future Joelle and I are program chairs for ICML 2012 in Edinburgh , which I previously enjoyed visiting in 2005 . This is a huge responsibility, that we hope to accomplish well. A part of this (perhaps the most fun part), is imagining how we can make ICML better. A key and critical constraint is choosing things that can be accomplished. So far we have: Colocation . The first thing we looked into was potential colocations. We quickly discovered that many other conferences precomitted their location. For the future, getting a colocation with ACL or SIGI
6 0.61046433 22 hunch net-2005-02-18-What it means to do research.
7 0.60737455 297 hunch net-2008-04-22-Taking the next step
8 0.60570019 286 hunch net-2008-01-25-Turing’s Club for Machine Learning
9 0.6040132 204 hunch net-2006-08-28-Learning Theory standards for NIPS 2006
10 0.60397899 44 hunch net-2005-03-21-Research Styles in Machine Learning
11 0.60397869 95 hunch net-2005-07-14-What Learning Theory might do
12 0.60237634 435 hunch net-2011-05-16-Research Directions for Machine Learning and Algorithms
13 0.60149699 256 hunch net-2007-07-20-Motivation should be the Responsibility of the Reviewer
14 0.60051006 116 hunch net-2005-09-30-Research in conferences
15 0.60004419 343 hunch net-2009-02-18-Decision by Vetocracy
16 0.59959787 96 hunch net-2005-07-21-Six Months
17 0.59845048 423 hunch net-2011-02-02-User preferences for search engines
18 0.59773391 207 hunch net-2006-09-12-Incentive Compatible Reviewing
19 0.59751022 452 hunch net-2012-01-04-Why ICML? and the summer conferences
20 0.59695995 40 hunch net-2005-03-13-Avoiding Bad Reviewing