Natesh Pillai

823 posts

Natesh Pillai

Natesh Pillai

@Bayesprof

AI + Math. Professor of Statistics @Harvard, Distinguished Engineer at LinkedIn. Scientist, Entrepreneur. Chess & Desserts fanatic. Grew up in Kerala.

Katılım Temmuz 2022
583 Takip Edilen769 Takipçiler
Natesh Pillai
Natesh Pillai@Bayesprof·
Amazing!! Congrats to all! India did a clean sweep at IPHO this year.
Malay Krishna@Malay4Product

I taught JEE physics for years. That paper breaks strong kids in three hours. This exam is five hours of theory and five hours of lab work, and these five did close to perfect scores on it. Let me tell you what actually happened. The International Physics Olympiad is the world championship of school physics. It was the 56th edition. Held in Bucaramanga, Colombia, from July 5 to 12. 381 students. More than 85 countries. Every one of them the best physics student their country could find. India sent five kids. All five came back with gold. Their names are Kanishk Jain from Pune. Riddhesh Anant Bendale from Indore. Rishit Garg from Dwarka in Delhi. Shresth Suraiya from Mumbai. Svarit Joshi from Ahmedabad. We know a hundred cricketers by their nickname and not one of these boys. :) That clean sweep put India at joint World Number One. Tied with China, Russia, Kazakhstan, South Korea and Taiwan. Those are countries that pour serious money and national pride into science education. We are standing level with them. Now here is what the exam actually was. Two papers. Each five hours long. The theory paper had three problems. One on the thermodynamics of paramagnetic cooling. One on the photoionisation of ozone. One on the dynamics of electron positron pairs. The experimental paper was another five hours in a lab, working through heat transfer and thermodynamic processes in fluids. That means you get given equipment you have never seen, and you have to design your own experiment, take your own readings, handle the errors, and reach a real answer. Not multiple choice. No shortcuts. No pattern recognition. You either understand physics or you sit there for five hours. HBCSE says the Indian students were near perfect on theory and excellent on the practical too. Now, this was India's 27th appearance at the IPhO. Across all those years, about 44 percent of Indian students have won gold, 41 percent silver, 10 percent bronze. In the last ten years, every single Indian student has come home with a medal. 62 percent gold, 38 percent silver. Not one kid has gone and come back empty handed in a decade. Five golds in one year has happened only twice. This year, and in 2018. So who built this. The programme is run by HBCSE, the Homi Bhabha Centre for Science Education. It sits under TIFR, which sits under the Department of Atomic Energy. They run the whole funnel. A national exam, then a national olympiad, then a brutal selection and training camp, and out of everyone in the country, five kids get on a plane. The team was led by Professor Anwesh Mazumdar of HBCSE-TIFR and Dr Leena Joshi from St Xavier's College, Mumbai. The scientific observers were Professor Ananda Dasgupta from IISER Kolkata and Nisha Kelkar from Gogate-Joglekar College in Ratnagiri. Yes. Ratnagiri. A college in a small coastal town in Maharashtra. This is public education doing something the private coaching industry could never do on its own. The coaching industry is very good at one thing. Teaching you to solve a known problem fast. That is what JEE and NEET reward, and I say that with love because I was part of that world. But an olympiad paper does not have a known type. There is no shortcut chapter. There is no formula sheet that saves you. You have to sit with a problem you have never seen and think. That is a completely different muscle. And a government funded centre has been quietly building it in Indian teenagers for 27 years. So yes, be proud. Loudly. HBCSE also shared that around 64 percent of India's olympiad medallists go on to do a PhD. But only about 32 percent of medallists end up settling in India. I do not say that to spoil the moment. These kids owe the country nothing. They earned every option they have. But it should tell us something. We are excellent at finding this talent. We are excellent at training it. We are still not great at giving it somewhere worth staying. Congratulations Kanishk, Riddhesh, Rishit, Shresth and Svarit. This is one of the best things an Indian did this year and most of the country will never hear about it.

English
0
0
12
1.3K
Natesh Pillai
Natesh Pillai@Bayesprof·
@paulg @paulg thoughts on how to select books in the future to read that are not AI slop? Of courses classic books are good, but I am talking about the ones that are yet to be written.
English
0
0
3
110
Paul Graham
Paul Graham@paulg·
Something I told 14 yo: People are going to stop reading books. I wish this wasn't so, but I fear it is. The silver lining in this cloud is that if you're one of the few people who still read, you'll have a huge advantage over everyone else.
English
573
1.3K
13.7K
965.2K
ellington
ellington@not_ellington·
Math and science needs more visualization and less equations. This paper is so beautiful bc you don’t get wrapped up in syntactical garbage. I feel like so many people like equations because they look and feel esoteric and make people feel Really Smart when they are in reality a really lossy means of idea communication. It is so easy to apply derivative rules via notation and remember the simple tricks but actually understanding the nuance behind the chain rule for instance is so much deeper than a d/dx. This is one reason it’s so much easier to learn things talking w Claude it’ll just tell you what the idea actually is. And the ideas are infinitely more interesting than the hieroglyphs we use to try to convey the meaning. NEVER think about math in terms of notation. Think in terms of spaces and gradients and shapes and curves. It is so much more rewarding. arxiv.org/abs/2206.07867
English
43
284
2.1K
140.8K
The Institute for Applied Ontological Mathematics
Everyone thinks the Feldman-Hájek theorem is "well known," but when you actually try to machine-check it, you realize modern formal libraries completely lack the operator theory that textbook proofs silently assume. No Hilbert-Schmidt class, no relative-covariance perturbation, and not even a real-scalar functional calculus. We couldn't just verify the theorem; we had to build its entire operator theory from the ground up.
English
2
0
1
106
Magnus Carlsen
Magnus Carlsen@MagnusCarlsen·
JA VI ELSKER DETTE LANDET🇳🇴🇳🇴🇳🇴
Dansk
193
996
20.9K
617.9K
Natesh Pillai
Natesh Pillai@Bayesprof·
A dear friend recently posed a puzzle that reminded me of Euler's formula connecting the circumradius and inradius. So, I made Fable5/cursor make a chalkboard talk video of it. This is completely AI; of course this is a very very preliminary attempt but still amazed by how much of this can be automated. @AnthropicAI would love to chat more to make maths/science more universally accessible at all levels.
English
2
6
16
2.2K
Natesh Pillai
Natesh Pillai@Bayesprof·
@B1ar2n3a Congrats on this amazing paper! Also, I share your exact optimism.
English
0
0
0
15
prathosh A P
prathosh A P@prathoshap·
A 15-year-old dream has come true today. I started a PhD with the dream of creating a system that chants any Sanskrit shloka perfectly. And here I am opening sourcing 𝐕𝐚𝐠𝐝𝐡𝐞𝐧𝐮 - 𝐀 𝐯ṛ𝐭𝐭𝐚 (𝐦𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐫) 𝐚𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐞 ś𝐥𝐨𝐤𝐚-𝐭𝐨-𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐭𝐞𝐱𝐭-𝐭𝐨-𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐞𝐜𝐡 (TTS) 𝐬𝐲𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐒𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐤𝐫𝐢𝐭. This is the world's first vrutta-aware, open-source TTS for Sanskrit Chanting.
prathosh A P tweet media
English
419
2.7K
10.2K
446.1K
Sunay Joshi
Sunay Joshi@sunay_joshi·
@Bayesprof Hi Natesh, any thoughts on the core stats PhD courses? Is a version of {math-stat + stat-methodology + applied-stat} ok? Should portions be cut + replaced with {emp ML / opt} (where we don't use a probabilistic model of the data)? (Perhaps yes, for your point 2 to be feasible?)
English
1
0
0
73
Natesh Pillai
Natesh Pillai@Bayesprof·
I don't know where PhD programs in statistics are going, but in the meantime, we can at least make the grad curriculum more useful: 0. Make gptpro/claude equivalent free for grad students; mandatory training and use of agentic workflow. Most universities still give only the 20$ version, not the most powerful one. 1. Revamp the grad programs and focus them toward "taste" and constructive criticism. I'd be ok with not having any written exams and instead having oral/take-home where students must use AI to replicate and then critique a published work to the committee's satisfaction. But here the standards have to be really higher than before for a student to "pass". This is the only thing we can still "teach". 2. Focus the grad program toward "building" instead of writing papers. A "thesis" can constitute constructing original data pipelines, assembling disparate data sources, open source of implementation of algorithms, etc. CS programs have been doing this for a while; stats has to catch up. 3. Formalize routine minimax arguments/convergence proofs via Lean, and focus on the key parts of the technical argument. In mathematics, up until recently, most graduate programs had a foreign language requirement. I wouldn't be surprised if they make Lean a language requirement in the near future.
English
6
12
100
15.2K
Natesh Pillai
Natesh Pillai@Bayesprof·
@AlexKontorovich Do you think we can formalize the current ABC conjectures proposed "proof" and put to bed once and for all, the nonsense around it? I'd love to know how much effort it will take to formalize Scholze's objections.
Alex Kontorovich@AlexKontorovich

Some more details on Alexeev's approach. Here is his zulip thread: #narrow/channel/583339-AI-authored-projects/topic/Erd.C5.91s.20unit-distance.20counterexample.2C.20exponent.20above.201/near/606778508" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">leanprover.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channe…

English
2
0
9
669
Natesh Pillai
Natesh Pillai@Bayesprof·
@AlexKontorovich This might be the first example where formalization will be used to say I told you so instead of the other way 🤣🤣🤣
English
1
0
2
90
Natesh Pillai
Natesh Pillai@Bayesprof·
@torgeirlysen I kind of agree with you, yes. But things have changed quite a lot compared to how they’ve been even just a couple of years ago.
English
1
0
0
195
Torgeir Lysen
Torgeir Lysen@torgeirlysen·
@Bayesprof I think that AI can be used to augment a lot of our research. However, I don’t think we should just be reviewing AI generated output. So I would push back against this being the only thing your program can or should still teach.
English
1
0
4
262
Natesh Pillai
Natesh Pillai@Bayesprof·
@VV2897 Don’t give up. The field needs you! Keep at it. Build your own and show it to depts.
English
0
0
2
207
Natesh Pillai
Natesh Pillai@Bayesprof·
@SokobanHero Yea. I’d be curious what this “minimal expertise” in each field will be. But if the oral exam is done well, then they shouldn’t be able to fake their expertise. Designing that exam is of course is key.
English
0
0
2
463
Sokoban_hero
Sokoban_hero@SokobanHero·
“I'd be ok with not having any written exams and instead having oral/take-home where students must use AI to replicate and then critique a published work to the committee's satisfaction.” Students need to fckn learn the material, not have AI do it for them. Certainly exams should be written and proctored. But a certain amount of homework should be done in person and proctored to ensure students aren’t having AI do it all.
English
1
0
0
610
Natesh Pillai
Natesh Pillai@Bayesprof·
@invictusqed no, not giving up on theory at all. There are various suitable analogues of "building" in theory as well, including playing around with algorithms numerically to design conjectures etc. But people are already doing some of this.
English
1
0
1
367
Laz
Laz@invictusqed·
@Bayesprof On 2. this reads to me like giving up on theory a bit? Building is fine if you're doing something very applied, but most of statistics research doesn't really lend itself to building right? Or are you saying the research taste should bend more applied
English
1
0
0
433