Why don't they link to the paper? This article is really crappy and doesn't explain what they did at all. For example, why diddn't they mention probabilist networks, which dominates this field. And I doubt that 240 data points is enough to write a paper.
unknown|11 years ago
[deleted]
gwern|11 years ago
I see nothing in http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=frenkel+Arutyunyan+kidne... and given the context, it was likely buried in an obscure Russian journal & so of no value to English readers anyway.
> This article is really crappy and doesn't explain what they did at all.
Seems like a good explanation to me.
> For example, why diddn't they mention probabilist networks, which dominates this field.
Because those weren't used much back then.
> And I doubt that 240 data points is enough to write a paper.
Sure it is. Why wouldn't n=240 work?
Chronic28|11 years ago