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

Statement on Nature Machine Intelligence

openaccess.engineering.oregonstate.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–19 of 19 posts

Re: Statement on Nature Machine Intelligence

#11

Post by Smerity »

There are already big names in this list and it was a a tenth (~30) only a few hours ago when I signed. Yoshua Bengio, Jeff Dean, Yann LeCun, Ian Goodfellow, ... Even if it only represents their personal opinion, like herd immunity I'm certain this will prevent widespread adoption.

When I started in NLP as an undergrad, almost all the papers I cared about were free to read from the ACL Anthology. As I shifted into broader machine learning, arXiv became my new home. Nature's closed Machine Intelligence would be a step back. I am glad that researchers and scientists want to keep research open and accessible.

P.S. It's already weird that Nature has DeepMind papers. At least in that case DeepMind have a formalized agreement / enough clout that they can host the paper themselves but even the hint of ambiguity can kill knowledge propagation at many institutions. An example would be "Mastering the Game of Go without Human Knowledge"[0] / "Mastering the game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search"[1].

[0]: https://deepmind.com/documents/119/agz_unformatted_nature.pd...

[1]: https://storage.googleapis.com/deepmind-media/alphago/AlphaG...

Re: Statement on Nature Machine Intelligence

#12

Post by esue-isa »

rossdavidh wrote: post #8
_delirium wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do notice no Google names, though. Google has tended to favor Nature in the past, e.g. AlphaGo went there instead of to an open-access ML journal. Of course regular Nature has an established level of prestige that this new Nature spinoff doesn't yet. So it'll be interesting to see which way they go on it.

It will be interesting to see if Geoffrey Hinton signs.

Mr Hinton for sure sign this before people prepare statement :]

Re: Statement on Nature Machine Intelligence

#13

Post by tedivm »

Smerity wrote: post #11

There are already big names in this list and it was a a tenth (~30) only a few hours ago when I signed. Yoshua Bengio, Jeff Dean, Yann LeCun, Ian Goodfellow, ... Even if it only represents their personal opinion, like herd immunity I'm certain this will prevent widespread adoption. When I started in NLP as an undergrad, almost all the papers I cared about were free to read from the ACL Anthology. As I shifted into br…

You don't need special clout for most journals (including Nature) in order to self publish. The Nature license [1] allows it directly, as do journals such as Science.

The main thing is that they typically don't allow you to publish it outside of your website. I also don't know what the terms of this new journal are going to be.

[1] https://www.nature.com/authors/policies/license.html

Re: Statement on Nature Machine Intelligence

#14

Post by agi_is_coming »

rossdavidh wrote: post #8
_delirium wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do notice no Google names, though. Google has tended to favor Nature in the past, e.g. AlphaGo went there instead of to an open-access ML journal. Of course regular Nature has an established level of prestige that this new Nature spinoff doesn't yet. So it'll be interesting to see which way they go on it.

It will be interesting to see if Geoffrey Hinton signs.

His page mentions that he's not working currently due to personal reasons, so you might not see his signature. http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~hinton

Re: Statement on Nature Machine Intelligence

#15

Post by baylearn »

tedivm wrote: post #13
Smerity wrote: post #11

There are already big names in this list and it was a a tenth (~30) only a few hours ago when I signed. Yoshua Bengio, Jeff Dean, Yann LeCun, Ian Goodfellow, ... Even if it only represents their personal opinion, like herd immunity I'm certain this will prevent widespread adoption. When I started in NLP as an undergrad, almost all the papers I cared about were free to read from the ACL Anthology. As I shifted into br…

You don't need special clout for most journals (including Nature) in order to self publish. The Nature license [1] allows it directly, as do journals such as Science. The main thing is that they typically don't allow you to publish it outside of your website. I also don't know what the terms of this new journal are going to be. [1] https://www.nature.com/authors/policies/license.html

Nature does have an "Open Access" option in their policy:

"Authors wishing to publish open access retrospectively should contact the individual journal editorial office, and will need to sign a new open access licence to publish form (LTP) and pay the journal's article processing charge."

http://www.nature.com/openresearch/about-open-access/policie...

However, they don't disclose how much money it costs to convert one's work to open access, and whether this option is available for all Nature journals, the main Nature journal, or just the specialized subject journals, such as Nature Machine Intelligence.

Re: Statement on Nature Machine Intelligence

#16

Post by _0ffh »

Smerity wrote: post #11

There are already big names in this list and it was a a tenth (~30) only a few hours ago when I signed. Yoshua Bengio, Jeff Dean, Yann LeCun, Ian Goodfellow, ... Even if it only represents their personal opinion, like herd immunity I'm certain this will prevent widespread adoption. When I started in NLP as an undergrad, almost all the papers I cared about were free to read from the ACL Anthology. As I shifted into br…

"As I shifted into broader machine learning, arXiv became my new home."

Similarly, when I researched machine learning topics for my master thesis (around 2001), citeseer.org proved to be an absolute treasure trove. I did not check out anything beyond machine learning and general computer science topics, but for these at least open access papers have quite a bit of tradition by now.

Re: Statement on Nature Machine Intelligence

#17

Post by peterhj »

nafizh wrote: post #5

I think (correct me if I am wrong) machine learning (and a lot of other fields within CS) is the first field that has completely shattered the closed journal type system in Academia. I work in an interdisciplinary field with an ML focus, and many non-ML faculty and collaborators are just so surprised hearing how the machine learning community generally approaches publications. There is no need whatsoever for the ML f…

arXiv started out with physics preprints.

Re: Statement on Nature Machine Intelligence

#19

Post by nabla9 »

Smerity wrote: post #11

There are already big names in this list and it was a a tenth (~30) only a few hours ago when I signed. Yoshua Bengio, Jeff Dean, Yann LeCun, Ian Goodfellow, ... Even if it only represents their personal opinion, like herd immunity I'm certain this will prevent widespread adoption. When I started in NLP as an undergrad, almost all the papers I cared about were free to read from the ACL Anthology. As I shifted into br…

>It's already weird that Nature has DeepMind papers.

Nature (the multidisciplinary journal) is a special case.

If you get article published in Nature you are not killing the knowledge propagation, you are enhancing it to the scientific community at large. It has maintained so much prestige that getting published there is type of signaling that still has value.

The old way of scientific publishing is going to shrink to almost nothing, but there is room for a handful of high-impact, high prestige publications like Nature to keep going. They would work like compendiums of best research in science.

Post reply on HN