Mel Andrews

904 posts

Mel Andrews banner
Mel Andrews

Mel Andrews

@bayesianboy

I’m not like the other Bayesians. I’m different. Thinks about philosophy of science, AI ethics, machine learning, models, & metascience. postdoc @ Princeton.

Philadelphia Katılım Mayıs 2019
8.8K Takip Edilen32K Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Mel Andrews
Mel Andrews@bayesianboy·
My article on AI for science, in which I characterize a deviant notion of scientific objectivity rooted in the impossible ideal of theory-free inference, is available now open-access in Erkenntnis link.springer.com/article/10.100…
English
7
50
276
39.9K
Mel Andrews
Mel Andrews@bayesianboy·
Mouse who modeled for the mouse model courtesy of my cats who placed him in my shoe as a gift.
Mel Andrews tweet media
English
1
0
8
589
Mel Andrews
Mel Andrews@bayesianboy·
In the early stages of drafting a manuscript, it can be helpful to draw a little mascot (mousecot?) to cheer you on.
Mel Andrews tweet media
English
1
0
54
1.8K
Mel Andrews
Mel Andrews@bayesianboy·
is this anything
Mel Andrews tweet media
English
1
0
35
1.6K
Mel Andrews retweetledi
neil turkewitz
neil turkewitz@neilturkewitz·
Beware of “ridiculous nonphilosophical questions that might serve companies’ commercial interests by portraying today’s AIs as closer to so-called superintelligence than they actually may be—while diverting attention from more immediate questions about its societal impacts.” 🙏🏼
Mel Andrews@bayesianboy

I was interviewed for this Science Magazine piece on industry funding, philosophy of AI, and conflict of interest disclosures. science.org/content/articl…

English
0
6
21
1K
Mel Andrews retweetledi
brent___x
brent___x@brentmichaelcox·
Important piece with good quotes from many who clearly say that the worry with philosophical/humanistic study being funded by AI is the power of subtly setting research agendas. People aren't "forced" to become marketers, their research agenda comes to subtend marketing goals./
Mel Andrews@bayesianboy

I was interviewed for this Science Magazine piece on industry funding, philosophy of AI, and conflict of interest disclosures. science.org/content/articl…

English
1
1
4
1.3K
Mel Andrews
Mel Andrews@bayesianboy·
I was interviewed for this Science Magazine piece on industry funding, philosophy of AI, and conflict of interest disclosures. science.org/content/articl…
English
0
25
103
12.5K
Mel Andrews
Mel Andrews@bayesianboy·
I do wonder for how much longer I will have to explain this at least once per day.
Mel Andrews tweet media
English
3
2
25
775
Mel Andrews
Mel Andrews@bayesianboy·
@ramonalvaradoq I’m voting to reject about ~5 of these for every reasonable paper I review. But the junk continues to get published nevertheless because there are so few competent reviewers.
English
0
0
1
23
Mel Andrews
Mel Andrews@bayesianboy·
@ramonalvaradoq And then there is what has become, over the last several years, the average philosophical paper on “AI.” Which falls far short of subject-matter literacy.
English
1
0
1
32
Mel Andrews
Mel Andrews@bayesianboy·
As philosophy rushes to claim expertise on AI, AI companies rush to control the philosophical narrative. Unlike other disciplines, philosophy has no standards for reporting conflicts of interest. This petition endeavors to change that: docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAI…
English
2
50
218
13.9K
Mel Andrews
Mel Andrews@bayesianboy·
There are actual, substantive, real-world consequences to appointing philosophers with pseudo-expertise in this subject.
English
1
0
10
624
Mel Andrews
Mel Andrews@bayesianboy·
On a related note and as someone with absolutely no conflicts of interest to report in this matter: if you are in a hiring position, please consider employing a philosopher with actual expertise in AI/ML.
English
1
0
13
722
Mel Andrews
Mel Andrews@bayesianboy·
I’m going to be honest, I write (for a living!) about how these tools work, including how they function (or fail to) in science and metascience applications; including, even, how biases infiltrate these applications. I could not have guessed that it was this bad or this blatant.
Mel Andrews@bayesianboy

When utilized in literature review, LLMs consistently 1. fail to mention female authors in female-led literatures, 2. insist that men are more influential when this is contradicted by objective citation counts, and 3. attribute women’s work to hallucinated male scholars.

English
1
22
150
7.2K

Keşfet

@ramonalvaradoq @elonmusk @BarackObama @taylorswift13 @cristiano @BillGates @NASA @nikifrancismediavine