Live data from Hacker News

A Software Engineer’s Adventures in Learning Mathematics

medium.com

41–50 of 227 posts

Re: A Software Engineer’s Adventures in Learning Mathematics

#41
post #33

I don't get the title. At least on my home country, a Software Engineer job title implies a CS degree with at least two years full of math.

Many places, including SV, have companies that give that title even to those who haven't studied CS or math formally.

But besides that, I see a deeper motivation in the article. The author says

"My dream is to learn the statistics, probability, and linear algebra needed to really understand machine learning and computer vision...I need a solid foundation so that I can truly understand what's going on: why something works, when it won’t work, and what to do differently if it doesn’t."

I contend that even many who have formally studied CS and math probably don't truly understand these math tools, that is, if they are using them in the first place. Intuition in math takes time to build up, and requires considerable mental effort.

Re: A Software Engineer’s Adventures in Learning Mathematics

#42
post #38
post #33

I don't get the title. At least on my home country, a Software Engineer job title implies a CS degree with at least two years full of math.

In real life, a software engineer can finish his studies and get a job with only a tiny knowledge of math, in every country, regardless what the curriculum says...

Well, it's a bit of an abuse of the term "engineer". It's really sad to see how software people first abducted it, and then degenerated it to a near obliteration.

Re: A Software Engineer’s Adventures in Learning Mathematics

#43
post #32

As a software developer who also started learning Mathematics for the same purpose (Machine Learning), I just could not do it with books. It is strange to explain, but I need someone with me to study. I need that person to say: "I don't understand it". Even if I don't understand it myself, as I try explaining it to my study partner, it starts clicking in my brain. I suddenly start to understand these parts as I'm exp…

I took Andrew Ng's Machine Learning course on coursera together with a friend. I had the software engineering skills, he had the math skills. Together we strived through all the excercises with a lot of discussions, helping each other and of course we had some disagreements which we learned even more from.

Re: A Software Engineer’s Adventures in Learning Mathematics

#45
post #26

Mary L Boas "Mathematical Methods in the Physical Sciences" [1] has absolutely been my favorite and most-used maths text in the 9 years since graduating uni. It's like a reference manual of just about all the non-CS (i.e. continuous/non-discrete) mathematical techniques required in my career. Highly accessible. It's a little too terse in places but I prefer this style of presentation over the insane long-form verbiag…

It is a fantastic book. It isn't (only) a reference book though. For me it was the best way of learning the maths used in my physics degree.

The book has many worked examples, and the extensive end-of-section questions have the answers in the back of the book (for every 2nd question). This means you can learn by "reading then doing", and see if you have got the answers right - something many textbooks lack.

When I try to learn from other technical books, I often find myself thinking "I wish they'd written this in the same style as Boas".

Re: A Software Engineer’s Adventures in Learning Mathematics

#47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CompSci is not engineering. It's almost math major, heavily on the discrete side of things.

This could not be further from the truth. I doubt my CS professors would be able to solve a PDE (or algebraic geometry etc etc). Likewise, few math professors would be able to write a parser generator (or code worth a damn). In contrast, I know engineers who live and breathe PDEs and tweak compilers to solve them faster.

Two things.

1) No such thing as universal mathematician in this day and age.

2) Engineer's PDEs(algorithms) are not the same as mathematician's PDEs(theory). Same as comparing a student in China who learned English to communicate with English speakers to English majors from English speaking countries.

Re: A Software Engineer’s Adventures in Learning Mathematics

#48
This topic comes up every so often. I think my previous comment applies here [1]:

I started a Math degree after 16 years of programming without any Math beyond high school (the highest being high school calculus). Most of my work as a software developer didn't require any "higher" Maths.

Once I began studying math, including Modern Algebra, Analysis, Graph Theory, Category Theory, etc., I realized I understood many topics on an informal level, in a non-rigorous sort of way, through programming. I had a good sense of major algorithms and data structures as well as their running times. Once I did have more math under my belt, things did become easier, and I started to see connections and commonality between problems across different domains, i.e. more than one way to skin a cat.

Part of the reason I began studying math, is that I felt it was my limiting factor. The range of problems I could tackle as a programmer was limited by math. It turns out this was partly true.

The biggest misconception is that in Math there is one "correct" answer. This is almost never the case. Some of the most interesting solutions in Computer Science come directly from Math topics that were once considered "abstract". Likewise, some of the most interesting problems are solved through approximation algorithms of seemingly intractable problems, often requiring a bit of "hacking" and real world experience beyond what you'd get from a formal education in Math or Computer Science.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7104566

Re: A Software Engineer’s Adventures in Learning Mathematics

#49
post #29

Usually good books travel from English speaking world to other languages as translations. One of the masterpieces that has gone the opposite direction is: Mathematics: Its Content, Methods and Meaning (three volumes bound as one) by A. D. Aleksandrov, A. N. Kolmogorov, M. A. Lavrent'ev (18 authors total) http://www.amazon.com/Mathematics-Content-Methods-Meaning-Do... This book is really good companion for autodidacts…

I own this book and I'll tell you it's not easy learning math from this book. Most of it is just very light overview. There are much better rigorous textbooks that are simpler and more complete.

There are some great textbooks translated from Russian. Analysis by Kolmogorov, (rigorous) Linear Algebra by Shilov, Complex Analysis by Markushevich to name a few.

Re: A Software Engineer’s Adventures in Learning Mathematics

#50

About 2 years ago, I had an intense urge to learn linear algebra, statistics and probability in depth for much the same reasons as the author - to improve my machine learning and computer vision skills. Really glad to see I'm not the only one. I don't have any recommendations for linear algebra, but for stats and probability (which I always found intimidating in the past), Allen Downey's "Think Stats" and "Think Baye…

For linear algebra, I'm a fan of Hoffman & Kunze. The clearest, most useful book on the subject I've used: http://www.amazon.com/Linear-Algebra-2nd-Kenneth-Hoffman/dp/...
Post reply on HN