I got a bit disappointing answers—people telling me how “this will not have impact” instead of answering the questions :) seriously, I think that it’s a 15 minute problem for someone who knows theoretical CS well. It could have some impact on a very hard problem. Not the best option probably, but what is better?
Isn’t it easier to spend 15 minutes to work on a CS theory problem, meeting new ppl, learning something ,instead of coming up with a long explanation of “why this is not the best choice”?
I’m a feminist but I’ll give a trad cis example to illustrate this because I don’t expect a feminist one to go well here (am I wrong?). In How I Met Your Mother the womanizer character Barney Stinson once had an issue. Women were calling him every minute and wanting to meet him. He couldn’t choose which one is “the best” choice. As a result he didn’t get to know any of them.
I feel it’s the same—so much energy spent on “if it’s the best thing to do” that even 15 minutes will not be spent on something new. Illusion of exploration—not actually trying the new thing but rather just quickly explaining why it’s “not the best”, spending most of the time “computing the best thing” and not actually doing it...
I think that it’s a 15 minute problem for someone who knows theoretical CS well
Question 1 certainly relates to well-known theory, e.g. Chomsky’s hierarchy of formal languages. The exact answer to the question really depends on what you want from your list. Do you just want a list of theorems in any order? Do you want a list of all theorems from simplest to most complex? Do you care about how long it takes to generate each item on the list? Formal systems vary widely as to whether their theorems can be enumerated efficiently, in order, or at all.
Questions 2-4 are getting pretty esoteric. This is the realm of “halting probabilities” and algorithmic information theory. There seems to be a big gap between general theory and the study of specific formal systems. If I google “statistics of formal systems”, I find exactly one match, a 2008 paper that leads nowhere… I feel like the study of primes by probabilistic number theory might qualify, as you can definitely define a formal system whose “theorems” are the primes. But I just don’t see any work out there, proving theorems about statistical learning of formal systems. Maybe I’ve overlooked it.
I got a bit disappointing answers—people telling me how “this will not have impact” instead of answering the questions :) seriously, I think that it’s a 15 minute problem for someone who knows theoretical CS well. It could have some impact on a very hard problem. Not the best option probably, but what is better?
Isn’t it easier to spend 15 minutes to work on a CS theory problem, meeting new ppl, learning something ,instead of coming up with a long explanation of “why this is not the best choice”?
I’m a feminist but I’ll give a trad cis example to illustrate this because I don’t expect a feminist one to go well here (am I wrong?). In How I Met Your Mother the womanizer character Barney Stinson once had an issue. Women were calling him every minute and wanting to meet him. He couldn’t choose which one is “the best” choice. As a result he didn’t get to know any of them.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_twv2L_Cogo
I feel it’s the same—so much energy spent on “if it’s the best thing to do” that even 15 minutes will not be spent on something new. Illusion of exploration—not actually trying the new thing but rather just quickly explaining why it’s “not the best”, spending most of the time “computing the best thing” and not actually doing it...
Am I not seeing it right? Am I missing something?
Question 1 certainly relates to well-known theory, e.g. Chomsky’s hierarchy of formal languages. The exact answer to the question really depends on what you want from your list. Do you just want a list of theorems in any order? Do you want a list of all theorems from simplest to most complex? Do you care about how long it takes to generate each item on the list? Formal systems vary widely as to whether their theorems can be enumerated efficiently, in order, or at all.
Questions 2-4 are getting pretty esoteric. This is the realm of “halting probabilities” and algorithmic information theory. There seems to be a big gap between general theory and the study of specific formal systems. If I google “statistics of formal systems”, I find exactly one match, a 2008 paper that leads nowhere… I feel like the study of primes by probabilistic number theory might qualify, as you can definitely define a formal system whose “theorems” are the primes. But I just don’t see any work out there, proving theorems about statistical learning of formal systems. Maybe I’ve overlooked it.