51–60 of 75 posts
Otherwise, you’ve just described yet another synthetic model that exhibits criticality (without proof no less). Which is not particularly interesting, unless your model subsumes other phenomena.
I wish authors would use their own voice instead of an LLM, especially in a rhetorical piece. I like the history of science, and might have otherwise read the authors' paper, but the use of LLM-isms throughout this page makes me worry that the arxiv submission will show the same lack of care/effort. Here's the manuscript at any rate, somewhat hard to find on the webpage: Convergent Discovery of Critical Phenomena Mat…
Fair call on the website — we built it fast and it shows. The paper itself is a traditional literature review and citation analysis. I am one of two human authors. We use standard methodology. Didier Sornette endorsed it for arXiv. Thanks for pulling out the direct link. I'll change the site to make it more prominent. This is my first serious attempt at social media engagement. Thanks for pointing out flaws and where…
Generative AI may be just the type of thing to connect these types of previously solved problems across disciplines.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fair call on the website — we built it fast and it shows. The paper itself is a traditional literature review and citation analysis. I am one of two human authors. We use standard methodology. Didier Sornette endorsed it for arXiv. Thanks for pulling out the direct link. I'll change the site to make it more prominent. This is my first serious attempt at social media engagement. Thanks for pointing out flaws and where…
"Fair call on the website — we built it fast and it shows." Oh, man, get out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're raising the right question, and the paper addresses it directly. The transfer wasn't as clean as "physicists applied their tools to other fields." Some specific cases: Wissel (1984) derived critical slowing down for ecology independently and was ignored for 20 years. The actual import to ecology came via economist Buz Brock, not a physicist. Nolasco & Dahlen (1968) derived period-doubling for cardiac tissue be…
> You're raising the right question > You're right that… > That's the point —
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're raising the right question, and the paper addresses it directly. The transfer wasn't as clean as "physicists applied their tools to other fields." Some specific cases: Wissel (1984) derived critical slowing down for ecology independently and was ignored for 20 years. The actual import to ecology came via economist Buz Brock, not a physicist. Nolasco & Dahlen (1968) derived period-doubling for cardiac tissue be…
> You're raising the right question > You're right that… > That's the point —
I think this whole operation just completely violates HN rules.
I wish authors would use their own voice instead of an LLM, especially in a rhetorical piece. I like the history of science, and might have otherwise read the authors' paper, but the use of LLM-isms throughout this page makes me worry that the arxiv submission will show the same lack of care/effort. Here's the manuscript at any rate, somewhat hard to find on the webpage: Convergent Discovery of Critical Phenomena Mat…
Fair call on the website — we built it fast and it shows. The paper itself is a traditional literature review and citation analysis. I am one of two human authors. We use standard methodology. Didier Sornette endorsed it for arXiv. Thanks for pulling out the direct link. I'll change the site to make it more prominent. This is my first serious attempt at social media engagement. Thanks for pointing out flaws and where…
I view it as nice that you’ve got someone serious who thinks the work is worth posting to arXiv, but the endorsement bar is generally quite low. I’d encourage you to send it to a journal (Didier might be able to recommend an appropriate venue) and really engage with the process and community. I’ve found that process to be extremely valuable (and humbling).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AI comment?
AI comment, AI article, AI research. This feels like someone asked their AI assistant to do all of this as some kind of experiment.
edit: (tried calling them. If there's a mac mini in the corner of their office doing this, that'd be an actually interesting story!)
It reminds me of “Tai’s method” of integration - an approximation discovered in 1994. https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/9602/rediscover... I think I found it in that other world that is the past on Slashdot - which was a Hacker News from another era https://m.slashdot.org/story/144664
I agree that's a good parallel. I had not seen it before. Thanks for the link.