RT @EmilyDamari1: Dear Members of the @PulitzerPrizes board,. My name is Emily Damari. I was held hostage in Gaza for over 500 days. On th….

RT @vardi: :-)

Yeah I'm here from now on:

BTW this is basically about Gauge fixing (determining the canonical solution to a Poisson system with null-space dofs).

The three types of reviewers

Thoughts? It seems like I'm missing something trivial.

I'm thinking "his Excellency" but reviewer 2 suggested I downgrade to "his okcy",.

Choose your title

What kinda of research expenses and teaching relief do you get from the fellowship of the ring.

Our CDTs (Centers for Doctoral Training) are great program-based opportunities for fully-funded PhD positions. Specifically, consider the Machine-Learning CDT:.If you are interested and specifically want to work with me on ML+geometry, contact me!.

RT @vabor112: Fully-funded #PhD in #ML at @EdinburghUni (@InfAtEd, @ancAtEd), in 𝐠𝐞𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐜 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 and 𝐮𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐫𝐭𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐲 𝐪𝐮𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧. Applic….

Hodge decomposition in the upcoming Directional version 3.0

I mean we also use the PD Laplacian where it should be ND. eventually, it's a convention, that's why I ignored it in the past, as long as one is consistent. But using the minus allows for curl(stream_function) to be exactly J*grad.

It's quite easy to miss that the dual->primal hodge star operator is actually -M1^{-1} (here Fig 2: . Coexact fields are not very well discussed. But without this, putting values in face centers and taking codifferentials results in a negative field.

What's the simplest strategy to create a decently smooth mesh that cages a point cloud? "Cages" means the point cloud is entirely within the cage, and the cage should be as minimally bounding as possible.

Of course nothing will truly prevent nastiness and subjectivity, but at least this sets a standard that you have to meet and is comparable across reviewers.

And then having filled this the system suggests a grade. If you don't like it you have to change your answer to the previous clauses.

Instead of "rate novelty from 1 to 10", more concrete questions of the form "Is the technique in the paper derived from previous work in a trivial adaption or composition. If yes, cite and explain".

ppl are like "let's allow AI to review papers", well, um, before we "certainly! delve" let's try to do more with the human-based system. My suggestion is to replace the subjective scoring system with a questionnaire that leaves less room for imagination,.

Our novel method finds hay in a haystack.