<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Deep learning and the renormalization group · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1301.3124/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1301.3124/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Deep learning and the renormalization group — mentioned by T-A</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9922652</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1301.3124:9922652</guid><pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2015 14:55:42 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;To establish in a semi-rigorous way the (btw obvious) relationship between coarsening in physics and in stacked neural networks, as was done long after the latter became a thing [1][2], is at the same level as observing the analogy between Black-Scholes and diffusion. It&amp;#x27;s cute, but it does not turn the subject into physics. It should go without saying that you can not, by definition, resolve fundamental questions about mathematical physics by experiment. The APS took a stand on climate change years ago [3]. It was clear enough to make Harold Lewis [4] and Ivar Glaever [5] resign in protest.…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1301.3124/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>quant-ph</category></item></channel></rss>
