<div dir="ltr">Dear Ming,<div> thank you for the support. The Nobel committee did not seem to have done due diligence. See the attached formal letter. Please distribute it widely.</div><div> Best regards,</div><div>-John</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Oct 9, 2024 at 8:52 PM Xie Ming (Assoc Prof) <<a href="mailto:mmxie@ntu.edu.sg" target="_blank">mmxie@ntu.edu.sg</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Dear John,<br>
<br>
I support your invoice. The awarded works have nothing to do with authentic learning, human-created or human-designed intelligence.<br>
<br>
Warmest Regards<br>
<br>
Ming XIE<br>
|Webpage: <a href="http://personal.ntu.edu.sg/mmxie" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://personal.ntu.edu.sg/mmxie</a> |Phone: +65 98379612 |Office: N3-02C-96 |<br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: BMI <<a href="mailto:bmi-bounces@lists.cse.msu.edu" target="_blank">bmi-bounces@lists.cse.msu.edu</a>> On Behalf Of Weng, Juyang<br>
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2024 5:15 AM<br>
To: bmilist <<a href="mailto:bmi@lists.cse.msu.edu" target="_blank">bmi@lists.cse.msu.edu</a>><br>
Cc: Juyang Weng <<a href="mailto:juyang.weng@gmail.com" target="_blank">juyang.weng@gmail.com</a>><br>
Subject: [Bmi] I Allege Nobel Prize in Physics 2024 Went to Misconduct<br>
<br>
[Alert: Non-NTU Email] Be cautious before clicking any link or attachment.<br>
<br>
[Instructions to subscribe or unsubscribe are attached at the end]<br>
<br>
Dear All:<br>
It happened again! Like the Committee of Turing Award 2018, the Nobel Committee for Physics 2024 does not have experts on neural networks either. Both committees selected AI frauds for their prizes. I allege that John Hopfield and Geoffrey Hinton committed the following research misconduct in their awarded work: (1) Cheating in the absence of a test; (2) Hiding bad-looking data. Their techniques are simply media hypes.<br>
The misconduct should have been willful because both John Hopfield and Geoffrey Hinton should have known that randomly initialized networks led to very different fitting accuracies on a validation set. Therefore, they should not have reported only the data from the luckiest network without reporting the average data from all the trained networks. Furthermore, they should not have called their Post-Selected fitting precisions as "test" because there is an absence of a test. The programmers know the validation set that was used for the Post-Selection of the luckiest network, like a mock exam.<br>
Such Post-Selection misconduct has flooded AI since their works and their models are not generalizable, so is true with a lucky lottery ticket. The Committee of Nobel Prize in Physics has promoted the misconduct, hurt AI, and misled AI applications. AI is undergoing another Great Leap Forward based on data falsification worldwide. Yes, fake money is driving real money away.<br>
For more information, see IEEE CDR Newsletters <a href="https://www.cse.msu.edu/amdtc/amdnl/CDSNL-V18-N3.pdf" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.cse.msu.edu/amdtc/amdnl/CDSNL-V18-N3.pdf</a>.<br>
Best regards,<br>
-John Weng<br>
________________________________<br>
<br>
CONFIDENTIALITY: This email is intended solely for the person(s) named and may be confidential and/or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete it, notify us and do not copy, use, or disclose its contents.<br>
Towards a sustainable earth: Print only when necessary. Thank you.<br>
</blockquote></div><br clear="all"><div><br></div><span class="gmail_signature_prefix">-- </span><br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">Juyang (John) Weng<br></div></div>