[Fis] Pause to Wait Pedro's New Year Lecture!
petitjean.chiral at gmail.com
Fri Dec 27 03:43:17 CET 2019
Dear Krassimir and dear Xueshan,
(1) I removed the private part of the closed discussion before sending to FIS.
Then, since there is a cooperation between FIS and IS4SI it appears to
me that it was useful to let the important comments of Xueshan
available to the FIS forum.
(2) Yes, technically, Shannon information deals with communication of data.
But information can be revealed from amounts of data.
Can it be done through computer?
Deep learning methods are based on data, but they are used to reveal
A famous example is the use of data during the campaign for the former
US presidential election.
In my opinion, there is indeed a link between computer science and
If it can be demonstrated that there is not, it would be a result of
crucial importance for the FIS community.
But it is likely that it is a matter of opinion, and that such a
result cannot be decided.
Le ven. 27 déc. 2019 à 00:57, Xueshan Yan <yxs en pku.edu.cn> a écrit :
> Dear Michel and Krassimir,
> Thank you for your very important comments. I especially appreciate Krassimir's "Computer science is an engineering science" and the hint that Shannon thinks "His theory was not about information".
> We are about to cross the boundary between 2019 and 2020. At this moment, Pedro will give a New Year Lecture every year. Here, he will summarize the FIS’s discussions in the past year and put forward the systematic arrangement in the next year. In his lecture, we usually can find some exciting ideas. So let's pause the current internal discussion on IS4SI's work and wait for Pedro's lecture.
> Best wishes
> From: Krassimir Markov <markov en foibg.com>
> Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2019 8:34 PM
> To: Michel Petitjean <petitjean.chiral en gmail.com>; Yan Xueshan <yxs en pku.edu.cn>
> Cc: Marcin SCHROEDER <mjs en aiu.ac.jp>; 钟义信 <zyx en bupt.edu.cn>; annette.grathoff <annette.grathoff en is4si.org>; fis <fis en listas.unizar.es>; mark burgin <markburg en cs.ucla.edu>; Wolfgang Hofkirchner <wolfgang.hofkirchner en is4si.org>; take <take en digital-narcis.org>; czc0910 <czc0910 en 163.com>; denizhan <denizhan en boun.edu.tr>; jdian <jdian en unileon.es>; Gustavo Saldanha <saldanhaquim en gmail.com>; 邬 <wukun en mail.xjtu.edu.cn>; Pedro C. Marijuan <pcmarijuan.iacs en aragon.es>; Gordana Dodig Crnkovic <gordana.dodig-crnkovic en chalmers.se>; leb <leb en create.aau.dk>; sbr.msc <sbr.msc en cbs.dk>
> Subject: "The Bandwagon" !
> Dear Xueshan, Michel, Marcin, and FIS Colleagues,
> I answer to your closed discussion, because Michel has posted it in FIS list.
> Culinary science is different from the science of making pots!
> Pots are just one of the technical tools that culinary science uses, but the end product of culinary science is the food, no matter with what means it is prepared.
> But neither the culinary science nor the science of pots can correctly define the concept of "delicious"!
> Computer science is the engineering science of creating data processing tools, as well as the science of data processing itself with computers.
> Please read Shannon's article "The Bandwagon" (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=1056774).
> He made it clear that his theory was not about information, it is just a theory of data transmission and it is too dangerous to transmit its results beyond the field of data transmission (communication).
> Some colleagues confuse “data” and “information” concepts.
> Replace the word "information" in their writings with the word "data" and you will get brilliant theories.
> The same applies to all other sciences - they can help with the right tools and experiments, but they can't define the concept of "information" correctly.
> The concept of "information" is a philosophical one and only in philosophy is it possible to give a good definition to be used by other sciences.
> Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
> Warm friendly greetings,
More information about the Fis