I actually have a preference towards Nature Communications over Nature, as Nature Communications actually allows more pages for explanation and as such typically has more rigorous research.
On the flip side, Nature often has bolder claims with less convincing evidence, which often reads similar to pop-sci articles.
Comments
Nature Communications is not Nature. But whatever.
That's fine. Here's a few of my online talks:
UC Berkeley / ICSI: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Zgul4oygMc
Stanford ICME: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQUItQi-B-I
and a couple of Mikes's
Institute for Pure & Applied Mathematics (IPAM) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmVuNRKsQa8
Physics Informed Machine Learning: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXhwLtjtUsI
and our KDD workshop KDD: https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3292500.3332294
many more talks and papers available
And my favorite, a podcast that has featured LeCun himself:
https://blog.rebellionresearch.com/blog/theoretical-physicis...
Oh and here's a 2 hour deep dive into the theory https://bluejeans.com/playback/s/cyQnC9EZZSB9HlHDjB1Zpu3fs0J...
I actually have a preference towards Nature Communications over Nature, as Nature Communications actually allows more pages for explanation and as such typically has more rigorous research.
On the flip side, Nature often has bolder claims with less convincing evidence, which often reads similar to pop-sci articles.