Comment by TrackerFF
3 years ago
"Not math-y enough"/ "Needs more math" is a very common feedback ML/AI researchers get when writing papers.
The other day I was watching a live-stream of a doctoral defense, as the thesis was quite relevant to my work.
So one of the committee members would really pick and criticize the math - ask questions like "You are supposed to be the bleeding edge on this topic, why was the math so simple? Did you research more rigorous theories to explain the math?" etc. (He was awarded the doctorate though)
So, I dunno, if that's how things are now - it makes sense to me that the authors go overboard with complicated notation, even if they could have written it much simpler. Probably makes the work seem more rigorous and legit.
Doesn't really take that much more time, and it covers your ass from "not rigorous enough" gotchas - though at the expense of readability.
Go read any article in the first 200 years or so of philtrans. There's lots of crucial science there written in a way that doesn't have the modern trappings of the form. It's good reading. Maybe some style perturbations borrowed from earlier eras would be good
https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/bibliography/62536 menu on the right
Benjamin Franklin, Robert Boyle, Isaac Newton, Maxwell, Ohm and Volt - they're all there. If that style was good enough for them ...