Bayesian Stats, Probabilistic Machine Learning, R & Stan, Open Source, and any linear combination of whatever may help me push the envelope in this needy world.
@eddelbuettel@joshua_ulrich after the improvements that base R has seen over the years, in which situations it's still worth using C++ instead of R directly for speed?
@joshua_ulrich Run the same matrix operations in two computers, local & remote. Couldn't use microbenchmark, so went with system.time instead. Which of user.self, sys.self, and elapsed is conceptually the closest to the time that microbenchmark measures? #rstat
@SalomoneRob I came across both uses of VI in the context of GPLVMs and Deep GPs. I'm learning VI for computer experiment emulation, so "standard" VI is what I'm most interested about (at least for now).
@SalomoneRob what read would you recommend for learning Variational Inference? I'm planning on use it on Gaussian Processes but I'm also interested in general canón material as well.
@SalomoneRob Thanks, this is great! Definitely gonna check out these resources. Like R for everyday tasks but can do Python, better be able to handle both these days :)
@uPicchini@matvil My goto reference book. It's all probabilistic, can't help trying it first and then Bishop if need be only. ML is evolving rapidly so a recent book has a clear advantage, but even 2012 smells old. I see them as a warmup/refresher/bkgrd before getting into the papers of interest
@smartin2018 I need multiple code views so much in RStudio :( Also some better refactoring tools, I'm starting to feel that it falls short once to get into developing a large codebase.
@MaartenvSmeden 1. none if it's a p-value, rather avoid that; 2. depends on model accuracy and the faith you have that it holds (usually close to none); 3. depends on domain-specific knowledge, sometimes 0.5 and 0.6 are the same; 4. also try to keep consistency with other figures & tables.
@betanalpha Awesome, makes more sense now. I think so far I've been thinking of model identification in terms of the joint pdf and never considered it from the point of view of the marginals, which are a byproduct of the joint. Thanks for the clarification, great insight!
@betanalpha I never considered (or realized) that our conditionals may not be enough to identify the **marginals**. So it's not about the joint not existing, or having a shape too hard to explore, but about the marginals not being in uniquely determined?
@vianey_lb Sounds like a great rule, I'll keep this in mind. Actually, it reminded of exposure therapy (https://t.co/9svriDRSSC), exposure therapy for academics.