CompSci Weekend SuperThread (August 28, 2020) Computer Science |
- CompSci Weekend SuperThread (August 28, 2020)
- New Applied Category Theory Server
- Apple Panel Interview Preparation
- Novel Version of PageRank, CheiRank and 2DRank for Wikipedia in Multilingual Network Using Social Impact
- Advice on Google Online Coding Challenge
- Create 3d photos from old photos as well!
- Cloud issues you should kmow
- A Note on Provability
- [R] Intel Lab Transforms Your Phone into a Robot for $50
- How's the book elements of discrete mathematics by Cl liu?
- A Note on Computability
- Top 10 Best FREE Artificial Intelligence Courses from Harvard, MIT and Stanford
- Meet Silq- The First Intuitive High-Level Language for Quantum Computers
- 11 Must-Know Machine Learning Algorithms for AI Professionals
| CompSci Weekend SuperThread (August 28, 2020) Posted: 27 Aug 2020 06:04 PM PDT /r/compsci strives to be the best online community for computer scientists. We moderate posts to keep things on topic. This Weekend SuperThread provides a discussion area for posts that might be off-topic normally. Anything Goes: post your questions, ideas, requests for help, musings, or whatever comes to mind as comments in this thread. Pointers
Caveats
[link] [comments]  |
| New Applied Category Theory Server Posted: 27 Aug 2020 10:09 AM PDT Applied Category Theory discord Server at https://discord.gg/gwfC6pr. The idea is to promote the application of Category Theory to other disciplines and to help others learn category theory so that they can apply it to thinking about their problems in various subjects outside mathematics. It is an experiment to see whether there are enough people interested in this mathematical subject to form a vibrant community online. If you know Category Theory and want to teach others about it so they can use it, or you want to learn about Category Theory to apply it to your specialized discipline outside mathematics then this is the place for you. It is brought to you by the folks that sponsor the Analytical Philosophy Server https://discord.gg/rZVdrPE and the Continental Philosophy Server https://discord.gg/BcaA9fn @cont0phil [link] [comments]  |
| Apple Panel Interview Preparation Posted: 28 Aug 2020 02:32 AM PDT Hey guys and gals! I'm an iOS developer with about 5 years experience, currently working in the industry. So I made it past a phone screen to the panel interview at Apple. It's 4-5 hours and done remotely because we are all living in a pandemic. So I just wanted good tips to best prepare and how much time I should spend preparing (1 week, 2 weeks, more?) I'll ask the recruiter these questions as well, but if anyone has gone through the panel process for the ApplePay team, please let me know. [link] [comments]  |
| Posted: 28 Aug 2020 02:26 AM PDT |
| Advice on Google Online Coding Challenge Posted: 27 Aug 2020 11:29 PM PDT I am a final year CSE undergrad from India and have my GOCC test tomorrow. Does anyone have any last-minute advice and tips to help do well in the test? [link] [comments]  |
| Create 3d photos from old photos as well! Posted: 27 Aug 2020 08:22 PM PDT |
| Posted: 27 Aug 2020 10:44 PM PDT |
| Posted: 27 Aug 2020 02:46 PM PDT It is necessarily the case that you can eventually generate all possible finite proofs on a UTM. It also necessarily the case that you can eventually generate all possible theorems on a UTM. This follows trivially from the fact that both proofs and theorems are finite collections of characters from some finite alphabet. As a result, it is necessarily the case, that you can generate all proofs, and all theorems, given enough time. In this view, where we mechanistically generate all theorems and proofs, being able to prove a theorem is being able to connect a given theorem to its proof, since as demonstrated, generating all possible theorems and proofs is trivial, given enough time on a UTM. At the same time, Gödel's First Incompleteness Theorem states that it is not as a general matter possible to prove or disprove all statements within a formal system. Therefore, Gödel's theorem implies that we cannot map every theorem to its proof, since that would be equivalent to being able to prove every theorem in the system, which is forbidden by the theorem. As a corollary, it must be the case that there is no computable mapping from the set of theorems to the set of proofs. If you assume otherwise, then you can prove every theorem in the system using a computable function, which would certainly violate Gödel's theorem. Does Gödel's theorem preclude the existence of any such mapping as a general matter? Or, does it imply that such any such mapping is not computable? Original post here: https://derivativedribble.wordpress.com/2020/08/27/a-note-on-provability/ [link] [comments]  |
| [R] Intel Lab Transforms Your Phone into a Robot for $50 Posted: 27 Aug 2020 11:42 AM PDT A couple of Intel Labs researchers have proposed a novel method for building a robot called "OpenBot" on just a US$50 budget. Complete design and implementation information has been open-sourced, all you need to supply is the brain and sensory system — your smartphone. Here is a quick read: Intel Lab Transforms Your Phone into a Robot for $50 The paper OpenBot: Turning Smartphones into Robots is on arXiv. [link] [comments]  |
| How's the book elements of discrete mathematics by Cl liu? Posted: 27 Aug 2020 10:40 AM PDT |
| Posted: 27 Aug 2020 12:36 PM PDT When I studied the non-computable numbers in college, I remember thinking that existing proofs were pointlessly longwinded, since you could show quite plainly, that because the reals are uncountable, and the number of programs that can be run on a UTM is countable, there are more real numbers than there are programs, which proves the existence of non-computable numbers. That is, there aren't enough programs to calculate all of the reals, and so it must be the case that some real numbers aren't associated with programs, and are therefore non-computable. But it just dawned on me, that you could have this result, even without resorting to the fact the reals are uncountable, since it could simply be the case that the set of all inputs to a UTM maps to some countable, proper subset of a countable subset of the reals. Expressed formally, let S \subset R, and assume that S is countable. That is, S is a countable subset of the reals, and because it's countable, it's a proper subset (i.e., obviously, S does not contain all of the reals). It could be simply be the case that the set of all inputs to a UTM, A, maps to only a subset of S. That is, even though S is countable, it could could still be the case that A maps to only a subset of S, and not the entire set. Here's a concrete example: Let K be the set of all non-computable numbers, which you can easily show is uncountable. Now let S be a countable subset of K. It follows that there is no mapping at all from A to S, since by definition, for each x \in S, there is no program that calculates x. So aside from this little result, I suppose the point is, that even if all of the reals don't exist, you could still be stuck with non-computable numbers. Original post here: https://derivativedribble.wordpress.com/2020/08/27/a-note-on-computability/ [link] [comments]  |
| Top 10 Best FREE Artificial Intelligence Courses from Harvard, MIT and Stanford Posted: 27 Aug 2020 06:57 AM PDT |
| Meet Silq- The First Intuitive High-Level Language for Quantum Computers Posted: 27 Aug 2020 05:22 AM PDT |
| 11 Must-Know Machine Learning Algorithms for AI Professionals Posted: 27 Aug 2020 05:22 AM PDT |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Computer Science: Theory and Application. To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States | |
No comments:
Post a Comment