Points of Significance: Statistics versus machine learning
By Danilo Bzdok, Naomi Altman, Martin Krzywinski. Nature Methods, 2018
1,194 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Signal Processing
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/fa9906b466bbbff3a8c206b499cd34323a91d1b2
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Artificial Intelligence
- Sarah Graham
- G. Verlato
- Ho-Cheol Kim
- M. de Choudhury
- Alexandros Iosifidis
- Momin M. Malik
- Nadia Antonucci
- John B. Torous
In Signal Processing
Citations in the corpus
- Artificial Intelligence for Mental Healthcare: Clinical Applications, Barriers, Facilitators, and Artificial Wisdom (2021, methodology): “ML differs from more traditional statistical approaches in several key ways: being more hypothesis-generating than hypothesis-driven; having minimal model assumptions rather than the strict assumptions required for statistical inference; and being focused more on predictions and pattern recognition ”
- Comparison of Conventional Statistical Methods with Machine Learning in Medicine: Diagnosis, Drug Development, and Treatment (2020, methodology): “A traditional statistical approach requires us to choose a model that incorporates our knowledge of the system, and ML requires us to choose a predictive algorithm by relying on its empirical capabilities [19].”
- Deep learning and computer vision will transform entomology (2020, background): “different from traditional statistical approaches to prediction (27).”
- A Hierarchy of Limitations in Machine Learning (2020, background): “47Similar papers, arguing for the neglected importance of prediction, are recently appearing for many other fields as well such as Yarkoni and Westfall (2017) for psychology and Bzdok et al. (2018) for biology.”