I use these resources and they will (hopefully) help you in understanding the theoretical aspects of machine learning very well.
Do you want to learn the maths for machine learning but don't know where to start?
This thread is for you.
🧵👇
I use these resources and they will (hopefully) help you in understanding the theoretical aspects of machine learning very well.
Read this thread for more details👇
https://t.co/sSN3jdxDwK
Are you planning to learn Python for machine learning this year?
— Pratham Prasoon (@PrasoonPratham) February 13, 2021
Here's everything you need to get started.
\U0001f9f5\U0001f447
- Trigonometry & Algebra
These are the main pre-requisites for other topics on this list.
(There are other pre-requites but these are the most common)
To manipulate and represent data.
- Calculus
To train and optimize your machine learning model, this is very important.
> A series of videos that go over how neural networks work with approach visual, must watch.
🔗youtu.be/aircAruvnKk
> This website helps you learn statistics and probability in an intuitive way.
🔗seeing-theory.brown.edu/basic-probability/index.html
> This is 15 years old but still 100% relevant today!
Despite the fact these lectures are made for freshman college students at MIT, I found it very easy to follow👌
🔗youtube.com/playlist?list=PL49CF3715CB9EF31D
https://t.co/3H7U2HJgTd
This is a beginner-friendly introduction to:
— Pratham Prasoon (@PrasoonPratham) January 24, 2021
Linear Algebra for Machine Learning.
\U0001f9f5\U0001f447
> A beautiful playlist of videos which teach you linear algebra through visualisations in an easy to digest manner.
🔗youtube.com/watch?v=fNk_zzaMoSs&list=PLZHQObOWTQDPD3MizzM2xVFitgF8hE_ab
>You'll find a course on everything here! Khan Academy is the first place I'll go to when I want to learn something.
🔗khanacademy.org/math
> A beautiful series on calculus, makes everything seem super simple.
🔗youtube.com/watch?v=WUvTyaaNkzM&list=PL0-GT3co4r2wlh6UHTUeQsrf3mlS2lk6x
More from Pratham Prasoon
More from Machine learning
Thanks for this incredibly helpful analysis @dgurdasani1
Two questions. 1/ Does this summarise the AZ published data :
The plan is to extend the time interval for all age groups despite it being largely untested on the over 55yrs, although the full data is not yet published
Do we have the actual numbers of over 55yr olds given a 2nd dose at c12 weeks and the accompanying efficacy data?
Not to mention the efficacy data of the full first dose over that same period?
I’d quite like to know whether I am to be a guinea pig & the ongoing risks to manage
You attached photos of excerpts from a paper. Could you attach the link?
Re Pfizer. As I understand it the most efficacious interval for dosing was investigated at the start of the trial.
Here’s the link to the
I’ve got to say that this way of making and announcing decisions is not inspiring confidence in me and I am very pro vaccination as a matter of principle, not least because my brother caught polio before vaccinations available.
Two questions. 1/ Does this summarise the AZ published data :
The plan is to extend the time interval for all age groups despite it being largely untested on the over 55yrs, although the full data is not yet published
SUMMARY: the Oxford/Astra trial examined dosing with gaps between 4-12 wks- although longer gaps appear to be limited mostly to younger participants. There was no difference reported in published data between these & efficacy from the 1st dose seems high for severe disease.
— Deepti Gurdasani (@dgurdasani1) December 31, 2020
Do we have the actual numbers of over 55yr olds given a 2nd dose at c12 weeks and the accompanying efficacy data?
Not to mention the efficacy data of the full first dose over that same period?
I’d quite like to know whether I am to be a guinea pig & the ongoing risks to manage
You attached photos of excerpts from a paper. Could you attach the link?
Re Pfizer. As I understand it the most efficacious interval for dosing was investigated at the start of the trial.
Discussions of 1 vs 2 doses suggest many are not aware of Pfizer's trials which evaluated 1 vs 2 dose immunogenicity, assessed multiple formulations (BNT162b1 BNT162b2 etc) & conducted dose-ranging in both young & old adults at the start. Saw "clear benefit of booster at day 21" pic.twitter.com/mpyxu9xFSF
— Dr Nicole E Basta (@IDEpiPhD) December 31, 2020
Here’s the link to the
I’ve got to say that this way of making and announcing decisions is not inspiring confidence in me and I am very pro vaccination as a matter of principle, not least because my brother caught polio before vaccinations available.
You May Also Like
The entire discussion around Facebook’s disclosures of what happened in 2016 is very frustrating. No exec stopped any investigations, but there were a lot of heated discussions about what to publish and when.
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
The story doesn\u2019t say you were told not to... it says you did so without approval and they tried to obfuscate what you found. Is that true?
— Sarah Frier (@sarahfrier) November 15, 2018
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
