Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Math Basics for Computer Science and Machine Learning [pdf]

cis.upenn.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 122 posts

Re: Math Basics for Computer Science and Machine Learning [pdf]

#81

Post by nostrebored »

tim1994 wrote: post #54
worldsayshi wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A friend with a math msc aluded at this, that it's kind of a math meme to call material "basic" or "introduction to" for rather advanced stuff. I feel like it's some kind of misguided intellectual humility. Kind of feels vaguely related to how so many Haskell packages are version "0.*".

I think it is a matter of perspective. The book covers stuff you learn in the first two semesters when studying maths. So for someone who studied maths (probably the author) these are the basics.

You were learning spectral theorem applications in the second semester of math?

Re: Math Basics for Computer Science and Machine Learning [pdf]

#82

Post by superviviente »

_russelldb wrote: post #60
Wurdan wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the person you're replying to was attempting to help people like me, who haven't had a math lesson since leaving high school (in my case over 16 years ago) and whose level of math is roughly "You want me to multiply something? Let me get my phone." So while the book in question might not be the best resource, it probably is a better starting point than the linked doc.

I wish someone would put together the "basic math" resource for people like that. I didn't do any maths beyond 16. I was an maths idiot at school (me? the teacher? I dunno) but since then I've worked 20 years in programming and had to learn more and more maths just to make a living. However, my maths is a rickety hodge-podge house, with no real foundations. I can't be a total idiot, because I've done some decent work…

I've had the same thoughts before. 'Basic Mathematics' by Serge Lang helped me a lot.

Re: Math Basics for Computer Science and Machine Learning [pdf]

#83

Post by collyw »

jointpdf wrote: post #25

“Math Basics” is quite the misnomer—it gives the impression that one would need to study all of the contents of this book to be an effective practitioner in CS or ML. Memorizing every definition and theorem in this book would be neither necessary nor sufficient for that purpose. Keep in mind it can take an hour, and sometimes way more, to really absorb a single page of a math book like this (do the math). This is mor…

Been writing software for over 15 years and its very rarely that I actually need to use any Maths. Occasionally yes, but very rarely.

Re: Math Basics for Computer Science and Machine Learning [pdf]

#84

Post by sa-mao »

tim1994 wrote: post #54
worldsayshi wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A friend with a math msc aluded at this, that it's kind of a math meme to call material "basic" or "introduction to" for rather advanced stuff. I feel like it's some kind of misguided intellectual humility. Kind of feels vaguely related to how so many Haskell packages are version "0.*".

I think it is a matter of perspective. The book covers stuff you learn in the first two semesters when studying maths. So for someone who studied maths (probably the author) these are the basics.

This is more like the first two years of mathematics course in the French Preparatory Classes for Great engineering schools Program.

Re: Math Basics for Computer Science and Machine Learning [pdf]

#85

Post by currymj »

this is an incredible reference for a machine learning researcher who wants to fill in some gaps in their existing mathematical knowledge.

But I would be shocked if this would be of any use for someone trying to learn a little linear algebra in order to play with neural networks. For that I think you still want Strang.

I think "foundations" might have been a better word than "basics" here. "Basics" in any case is not in the printed title, only in the filename.

Re: Math Basics for Computer Science and Machine Learning [pdf]

#86

Post by Koshkin »

PopeDotNinja wrote: post #34
jointpdf wrote: post #25

“Math Basics” is quite the misnomer—it gives the impression that one would need to study all of the contents of this book to be an effective practitioner in CS or ML. Memorizing every definition and theorem in this book would be neither necessary nor sufficient for that purpose. Keep in mind it can take an hour, and sometimes way more, to really absorb a single page of a math book like this (do the math). This is mor…

This is book 1962 pages long. If this is basic, how long is the advanced book?!

Actually. many "advanced" texts are rather short (perhaps because they are more specialized or they do not need to be verbose or "entertaining" like many elementary texts are).

Re: Math Basics for Computer Science and Machine Learning [pdf]

#87

Post by digitalsushi »

collyw wrote: post #83
jointpdf wrote: post #25

“Math Basics” is quite the misnomer—it gives the impression that one would need to study all of the contents of this book to be an effective practitioner in CS or ML. Memorizing every definition and theorem in this book would be neither necessary nor sufficient for that purpose. Keep in mind it can take an hour, and sometimes way more, to really absorb a single page of a math book like this (do the math). This is mor…

Been writing software for over 15 years and its very rarely that I actually need to use any Maths. Occasionally yes, but very rarely.

I have been writing software for over 20 years and I very regularly find that I am presented a challenge to learn new math, but am still rewarded mightily even if I do not engage it.

Re: Math Basics for Computer Science and Machine Learning [pdf]

#90

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

jefft255 wrote: post #69
duckqlz wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “Math Basics” is quite the misnomer—it gives the impression that one would need to study all of the contents of this book to be an effective practitioner in CS or ML. To me basics mean that if you study this entire book you won’t be able to understand ML otherwise it would say comprehensive. Furthermore the math presented in this book are all taught in 1st year courses for most CS programs I’ve encountered. > Keep…

Which CS program? I think you’re more than exaggerating. They don’t teach topology, FEM and abstract algebra in “most” CS program. These are just three random examples; most of the book is wayyy more advanced than what I would expect to learn in freshman CS.

This book seems to be designed as a primer for PhD research students - which might include some talented final year undergrads heading in that direction.

If that's your level, it might reasonably be called "basic."

For everyone else - no.

Post reply on HN