Talk:Vladimir Vapnik

Untitled
What is the ATT? -- Zoe

ATT is this: http://www.research.att.com/index.cfm

note that vapnik seems also to be associated with this university: http://clrc.rhul.ac.uk/people/vlad/index.shtml

h-index
According to Google Scholar, Vapnik's h-index is 84 [1]. From where have you got that Vapnik's h-index is 115? Rgarcialeiva (talk) 08:53, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

[1] https://scholar.google.es/citations?user=vtegaJgAAAAJ&hl=es&oi=sra

Professional title
I've noticed wikipedians calling every machine learning researcher a computer scientist even if they don't actually have any computer science training or background. I'm assuming these are written by laymen or computer science people who may or may not have ulterior motives.

The field of Machine Learning is not actually computer science. You would never be able to enter a graduate ML program with a CS background alone. Machine Learning historically began as a mathematical model of cognition. The field is more aptly described as a subfield of mathematical statistics, or applied mathematics.

Laymen have this idea of ML as a CS field because CS departments have aggressively branded it as their own thing and recruited prominent researchers into their own departments, but their work is often very separate from the rest of the department. I suppose this has effectively created separate ML academia within CS departments with both faculty and students at this point, but I still think it is very misleading (and disingenuous) to call it CS, especially for aspiring ML scientists who may wrongly take up CS majors with no math background (the math is infinitely more important).

We should revise every ML researcher page. 38.98.171.24 (talk) 07:19, 27 March 2024 (UTC)