tfburns
tfburns t1_ist506l wrote
Reply to comment by COPCAK in [D] Machine Learning conferences/journals with a mathematical slant? by vajraadhvan
>Theoretical papers are welcome at the major conferences, but not that common.
Agreed, which the caveat that 'theoretical' here rarely means more than 'statistics' / 'optimization'. Math is basically non-existent in ML.
tfburns t1_ist4ozb wrote
Frankly, none of the major venues can reliably evaluate mathematical work. I have seen some reasonable evaluations of work which use some simple objects/concepts which are new to the ML community, but those are rare. There is quite a lot of statistics published, e.g. at COLT. But very little to no math. For that, you're better to go to math venues ime.
tfburns t1_ist5aup wrote
Reply to comment by andreichiffa in [D] Machine Learning conferences/journals with a mathematical slant? by vajraadhvan
>Overall heavily mathematical papers, when properly contextualized and given intuitive understanding of proofs tend to be very popular.
Strongly disagree. MLers have a very limited appreciation of 'math'.