The Voynich Ninja - New research paper

Pages: 1 2 3 4

(deleted

(23-11-2025, 02:38 PM)Digitalgoldfish79 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(23-11-2025, 02:31 PM)Philipp Harland Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Research is the process of identifying a problem and then using relevant, applicable methods to resolve it. AI cannot write and debug code, especially not for this purpose. The graphs are a result of hallucinating.

Let's try an example with something in my field. As I am a mathematician by trade, that field is mathematics, obviously.

Let's say we have a hypothetical family of differential equations, D. Let's say D is vastly uncharted in terms of mapping out its properties and relations to other families of differential equations, i.e. there have only been 1-2 papers on D in the past 10 years since its discovery and those papers haven't really made much progress.

AI couldn't be of any use, especially not for writing and debugging code that could help us understand D.

That's the fatal flaw. You've probably heard this before, but AI cannot produce novel information. It's just a numbers-in numbers-out machine.

I understand AI very well, and it's perfectly capable of suggesting appropriate statistical techniques, and then writing code to help you do execute them. The work I did was purely in Termux using python. We start with EVA and go from there. What's the difference between that and any other computational statistics? What's not right is where people try to operate entirely within the Chatgpt environment. That's fatal as it will hallucinate, forget, and generally create a mess. I have python scripts and tsvs for every single calculation in my paper, but I admit my figures are broken which is highly embarrassing and I will fix them

I'm curious now. I'd like to test your knowledge about AI. Explain how an LLM works without using Google or LLMs themselves. A summary in 200 words or less would be nice.

(deleted)

(23-11-2025, 02:49 PM)Digitalgoldfish79 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(23-11-2025, 02:47 PM)Philipp Harland Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(23-11-2025, 02:38 PM)Digitalgoldfish79 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(23-11-2025, 02:31 PM)Philipp Harland Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Research is the process of identifying a problem and then using relevant, applicable methods to resolve it. AI cannot write and debug code, especially not for this purpose. The graphs are a result of hallucinating.

Let's try an example with something in my field. As I am a mathematician by trade, that field is mathematics, obviously.

Let's say we have a hypothetical family of differential equations, D. Let's say D is vastly uncharted in terms of mapping out its properties and relations to other families of differential equations, i.e. there have only been 1-2 papers on D in the past 10 years since its discovery and those papers haven't really made much progress.

AI couldn't be of any use, especially not for writing and debugging code that could help us understand D.

That's the fatal flaw. You've probably heard this before, but AI cannot produce novel information. It's just a numbers-in numbers-out machine.

I understand AI very well, and it's perfectly capable of suggesting appropriate statistical techniques, and then writing code to help you do execute them. The work I did was purely in Termux using python. We start with EVA and go from there. What's the difference between that and any other computational statistics? What's not right is where people try to operate entirely within the Chatgpt environment. That's fatal as it will hallucinate, forget, and generally create a mess. I have python scripts and tsvs for every single calculation in my paper, but I admit my figures are broken which is highly embarrassing and I will fix them

I'm curious now. I'd like to test your knowledge about AI. Explain how an LLM works without using Google or LLMs themselves. A summary in 200 words or less would be nice.

Don't be an arse

I'm not. I'm trying to sincerely test your knowledge. No ill intent.

(23-11-2025, 02:23 PM)Digitalgoldfish79 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Thank you.. I stupidly uploaded the wrong diagrams... I'll recreate them in python

Oh really? Because there are right and wrong diagrams in your 36-page article?

P.S. Why do you keep repeating the word Python?
Is it some kind of magic word that solves all problems?

(deleted)

(23-11-2025, 02:52 PM)Ruby Novacna Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(23-11-2025, 02:23 PM)Digitalgoldfish79 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Thank you.. I stupidly uploaded the wrong diagrams... I'll recreate them in python

Oh really? Because there are right and wrong diagrams in your 36-page article?

P.S. Why do you keep repeating the word Python?
Is it some kind of magic word that solves all problems?

Yes indeed... Some of the figures are wrong... I need to understand why, because they were created by code and I clearly missed them. The data are real. I have tsvs for every statistics and I have the code that produced it. What seems to have happened is a bug in the code that created the graphics.. it happens it doesn't undermine the findings, but it's extremely embarrassing..

I hadn't realised how paranoid everyone was about AI... I'm head of digital and AI for a bank and we have teams of people using it every day to write code and do statistics.. this is all pretty normal to me...

Instead of just stating that Chi-squared and Fisher tests on the data showed a lack of independence and randomness it would have been useful to present some definite examples from the manuscript. In order for us to judge whether you have applied these methods correctly you really do need to give us more of your calculations.

My own efforts to apply statistical hypothesis testing techniques on the text of the manuscript has raised many anomalies. A lot of data is many standard deviations away from what would be expected. It just highlights what we know already, that the text is irregular and doesn't have an easy explanation.

(23-11-2025, 02:58 PM)Digitalgoldfish79 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I hadn't realised how paranoid everyone was about AI... I'm head of digital and AI for a bank and we have teams of people using it every day to write code and do statistics.. this is all pretty normal to me...

Using AI for research is normal (not always beneficial, but this is another question). Creating something with AI and just putting it in a paper and giving it for people to read, without checking if the graphs make sense first, looks like a waste of everybody's time to me. Do you agree with this?

(23-11-2025, 03:11 PM)dashstofsk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Instead of just stating that Chi-squared and Fisher tests on the data showed a lack of independence and randomness it would have been useful to present some definite examples from the manuscript. In order for us to judge whether you have applied these methods correctly you really do need to give us more of your calculations.

My own efforts to apply statistical hypothesis testing techniques on the text of the manuscript has raised many anomalies. A lot of data is many standard deviations away from what would be expected. It just highlights what we know already, that the text is irregular and doesn't have an easy explanation.

Thank you.. that's actually helpful critique..

(23-11-2025, 03:12 PM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.[quote="Digitalgoldfish79" pid='74463' dateline='1763906309']
I hadn't realised how paranoid everyone was about AI... I'm head of digital and AI for a bank and we have teams of people using it every day to write code and do statistics.. this is all pretty normal to me...

Pages: 1 2 3 4