Category: Writers

Chomsky et al., on Chatgpt

Chomsky et al., have some very interesting linguistic and philosophical points on chatGPT/AI and their variants (see NYT link).

To quote


“The human mind is not, like ChatGPT and its ilk, a lumbering statistical engine for pattern matching, gorging on hundreds of terabytes of data and extrapolating the most likely conversational response or most probable answer to a scientific question. On the contrary, the human mind is a surprisingly efficient and even elegant system that operates with small amounts of information; it seeks not to infer brute correlations among data points but to create explanations.”

The philosophical and ethical viewpoints expressed in this article are indeed noteworthy. What probably is even more important is the linguistic viewpoint which amalgamates language with human thought process, and that is what makes this article more interesting and unique.

My own take on Chatgpt has been ambivalent because I do see tremendous potential, but also some obvious faults in it. About a couple of months ago, I did try to play around with it, especially in the context of some obvious questions I had on optical forces, and the answers I got were far from satisfactory. At that time, I assumed that the algorithm had some work to do, and it was probably in the process of learning and getting better. The situation has not changed for better, and I do see some major flaws even now. Chomsky’s article highlighted the linguistic aspects which I had not come across in any other arguments against artificial intelligence-based answer generators, and there is some more food for thought here.

This is indeed an exciting time for machine learning-based approaches to train artificial thought process, but the question remains whether that process of thought can somehow emulate the capabilities of a human mind. 

As humans, a part of us want to see this achievement, and a part of us do not want this to happen. Can an artificial intelligence system have such a dilemma?

Basic advice to undergrads: written assignments

Below is some basic advice I shared with my undergraduate class (Physics majors/Optics). This may be useful to other students here.

  • Do not copy a text verbatim, unless you are quoting the text as it is, with reference at that location.  If you use a source, then write a summary in your own words and cite the original source at the location of your text.
  • In the absence of primary data (which you generate originally), you will be using secondary sources such as research papers, books and internet content. For scholarly purposes (including assignments), it is better to use journal articles and books as references. Wikipedia is essentially a tertiary reference. Although some entries are good, wikipedia content is generally taken from a book or a research paper. Identify that source and use it for your assignment and reference. Directly citing wikipedia (which is usually not peer reviewed by experts) is not a general practice in scientific literature. 
  • When you take a figure or equation from a secondary resource (paper, book, internet), it is important that you cite the source in figure caption/equation location.
  • In an assignment, I am mainly interested in reading what you think about the topic under consideration. Feel free to put down your thoughts and compare and contrast it to the literature you use. This is where the thinking + learning happens.
  • For some general advice on referencing, especially for online communication, have a look at my blogpost.
  • To appreciate importance of written communication in learning, have a look at another blogpost.

A relevant book and its review

A book review has appeared an important and timely book on a topic which is subject to misinformation:

Are Electromagnetic Fields Making Me Ill? How Electricity and Magnetism Affect our Health, by Bradley J. Roth

reviewed by Robert G. Olsen in the most recent issue of the American Journal of Physics. https://aapt.scitation.org/doi/full/10.1119/5.0107970

As the reviewer says:


“While the focus is on the specific controversies listed in the table of contents, an even more valuable contribution of the book is the description of Roth’s methodology. In describing his approach to evaluating the science (or lack thereof) behind each claim, you will learn some of the thought processes needed to evaluate any new technology. Anyone who adopts these approaches will become a better investigator of new claims”

I have been following book-reviews of American Journal of Physics
There are some really good recommendations and assessments.

Indian Philosophy and Independent thought

Today we mark the 75th anniversary of Indian independence from the British colonial rule. For a country of our population and size, it is indeed a great achievement that we have sustained to be a democratic nation. We continue to be a work in progress and there is a lot to learn and look forward to.

India today is awash in the tri-colour flag, which marks a symbol of our identity.

This symbol has a deeper philosophical meaning, and it has been wonderfully described by one of the great Indian philosopher Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan (also first vice-president of India, and subsequently President of India) as follows :

“Bhagwa or the saffron colour denotes renunciation of disinterestedness. Our leaders must be indifferent to material gains and dedicate themselves to their work. The white in the centre is light, the path of truth to guide our conduct. The green shows our relation to soil, our relation to the plant life here on which all other life depends. The Ashoka Wheel in the center of the white is the wheel of the law of dharma. Truth or satya, dharma or virtue ought to be the controlling principles of those who work under this flag. Again, the wheel denotes motion. There is death in stagnation. There is life in movement. India should no more resist change, it must move and go forward. The wheel represents the dynamism of a peaceful change.”

Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, Constituent Assembly of Independent India

The metaphor of wheel to go forward is noteworthy. It essentially states that we as a society should be forward-looking and evolve our thoughts as we make progress. Such a call for evolution of thought and progress is not alien to our civilization.

Lest we forget – Indian philosophy is not just a spiritual literature, it has immense depth and discussion on rationality and logic, and places emphasis on debates and arguments. So much so, that even our great, ancients poets such as Kalidasa uphold this rational spirit in their writings. To quote from his famous Malavikaagnimitram :

पुराणमित्येव न साधु सर्वंन चाऽपि काव्यं नवमित्यवद्यम्।

सन्तः परीक्ष्यान्यतरत् भजन्तेमूढ्ः परप्रत्ययनेयबुद्धिः ॥

-मालविकाग्निमित्रम् (महाकवि कालिदास)

The translation (source) from Sanskrit means :

All poems are not good only because they are old. All poems are not bad because they are new. Good and wise people examine both and decide whether a poem is good or bad. Only a fool will be blindly led by what others say.

-Malavikaagnimitram (Great Poet Kaalidaas)

My hope is that we as a society get inspired by these calls for rationality, and adapt empathy, humility, logical and scientific thinking as some of the core principles our lives. This is not only for a better India, but also for a better world.

After all, as one of ancient Indian philosophical text (Maha Upanishad, 6.71–75) says :

अयं निजः परो वेति गणना लघुचेतसाम्!!

उदारचरितानां तु वसुधैव कुटुम्बकम् !!

which is transliterated as :

This is mine, that is his, say the small minded,

The wise believe that the entire world is a family.

Dear Indian people….Happy 75th Independence Day !

12 Years as a faculty member in India – 12 lessons

Today I complete 12 years as a faculty member at IISER-Pune. I have attempted to put together a list of some lessons that I have learnt so far. A disclaimer to note is that this list is by no means a comprehensive one, but a text of self-reflection from my viewpoint on Indian academia. Of course, I write this in my personal capacity. So here is it..

  1. People first, infrastructure next – As an experimental physicist, people and infrastructure at working place are of paramount importance. When I am forced to prioritize between them, I have chosen people over infrastructure. I am extremely fortunate to have worked with and continue to work with excellent students, faculty colleagues, and admin staff members. I think a good work place is mainly defined by the people who occupy it. I am no way neglecting the role of infrastructure in academia, especially in a country like India, but people have a greater impact in academic life than infrastructure.
  2. Create internal standards – In academia, whether you like it or not, there will be evaluations and judgments on your research and teaching. Generally, every academic ecosystem has its own standards for evaluating people. These standards are generalized principles and are not customized to an individual. Therefore, it was important for me to realize what good work meant and how to judge myself. As long as internal standards are high, and are properly met with consistency, the external evaluation becomes secondary. This attitude totally frees up the mind, and helps me to get better compared to my previous self. This also means I can appreciate others work without having to compare myself to them.
  3. Constancy and Moderation – When it comes to any work, it is important to be consistent over a long period of time. An equally important aspect is to moderate the amount of work done for a period. Most of the important work in research happens in units of months if not years. Therefore, constant effort with moderation keeps the motivation high, and makes the work enjoyable. Binge-working is attractive, but for intellectual work it is ineffective.
  4. Writing is a great tool to think – One of the most underestimated tools of thinking is writing. Not just formal writing, but the process of external articulation of thought on paper does wonders. Countless times, I have obtained, clarified and developed my thoughts only after I started writing about it. Writing is integral part of research and not just a communication tool.
  5. Importance of philosophy – Ever since I was an undergrad, I have been interested in philosophy of science. I had never taken a formal course on philosophy, but I have gradually started appreciating the role of philosophy of science. Specifically, it has catered to my question on ‘why I do what I do?’
  6. Teaching as social responsibility – In the Indian academia, scientific social responsibility is a buzz word. For me, the greatest social responsibility as an academic comes in the form of teaching. In larger scheme of things, some how we tend to neglect the impact of conventional teaching on students. Also, this impact is not easily measured. But the joy one obtains seeing a student do well is priceless. This local impact is what I value more because the feedback is there to see, right in front of you.
  7. Science, sports and arts : a trinity – I love outdoor sports including running, swimming, cricket etc. Equally, I enjoy listening to music, reading poetry and appreciating any form of art from any culture. I have found that it has not only made me a better person, but also has positively impacted my work. Taken as a trinity, these human endeavours continue to enrich our lives.
  8. Emphasis on mental and physical health – The most important policy that I have set in my research group is this: To do effective and enjoyable work, your mental and physical health should be good. There is no point in doing good work at the expense of your health. Therefore the priority will always be good health followed by good work.
  9. Social media : effective if used properly – Social media has a unique reach. If you are in India, and you want to connect to the scientific world, social media is an excellent platform. Given the size and diversity of India, social media can also reach people from various backgrounds and languages. If used responsibly, social media can have great impact on how science is communicated within India and how India connects to the scientific world.
  10. Renewed interest in applied mathematics and coding – During my BSc (Maths, Physics, Electronics) and MSc (Physics), I had excellent training and exposure in mathematics. During the lock-down period, I rejuvenated my interest in applied mathematics (especially nonlinear dynamics) and have started coding too. This has added a new impetus to my research and should reflect in the coming years.
  11. Professor as a post-doc – A research strategy I found useful in my work is to treat myself as a post-doc in the lab. Given that, in India retaining a long-term post-doc is difficult, many of the skills and thought processes cannot be effectively transferred in lab. A long term research problem needs sustained effort in the lab. As an experimental faculty it is easy to get caught up in activities outside the lab and lose touch with the (optical) bench work. Thanks to the lock-down period, I was the only one in the lab for almost 6 months,and I restarted my experimental work. I value that time and I see great benefit in this approach.
  12. Self-mentoring – A lot of academic advice is written by people working in the west. A few of them are general and applicable to Indian academia, but many of them are not. In such a situation, as an academic I try to derive inspiration by reading, especially about people who have done great work in India. I have been deeply influenced by people such as M. Visvesvaraya and Ashoke Sen. 

Sagan’s quote

Keynote address at CSICOP conference in 1987. “Do Science and the Bible Conflict?” Book by Judson Poling, p. 30, 2003

Even before the age of social media, Carl Sagan played a prominent role in communicating science to the public. His book ‘Cosmos’ is a classic, and his public lectures (a few are on YouTube) are certainly worth watching.

For me what is very impressive about Sagan’s communication is that he is not condescending by any means. This attitude is probably one the most important aspect in communicating science to society. The moment the public feels that scientific thinking is an elitist’s endeavour, they tend to repel.

Not only was Sagan an excellent scientist, but also a person who articulated the role of science in society, especially by contrasting it to religion and politics. A very famous quote of his is reproduced here, that highlights the value of scientific thinking, and how it elevates the human mind.

Quote reference: Keynote address at CSICOP conference in 1987. “Do Science and the Bible Conflict?” Book by Judson Poling, p. 30, 2003

53. Karnad’s preface to his memoir

One of the important aspects of reading a preface to a book is to know why an author wrote that book. This is one place where authors freely express their opinion on various things, and sometimes this opinion is not necessarily related to that book. For me, reading the preface connects me to the author in a better way than say, reading a review of the book, which I generally do after reading the book. Over the years, I have made it a habit to read the preface of almost any book I have come across.
In this context, recently I came across one of the most hilarious prefaces I have read. This is from Girish Karnard‘s memoir (translated from Kannada) titled : this life at play.


Below I reproduce the preface (which is by the way, available online) :

Dharwad, 1973

Aayi (my mother), Bappa (my father) and I were having lunch. My first film Samskara had won the President’s Gold Medal. My second, Vamsha Vriksha, had had a successful run and won the National Award for best direction. My latest film Kaadu was in the final stages of production. I was a Sangeet Natak Akademi awardee. And I had just been named the director of the Film and Television Institute of India. The air at home was thick with self-congratulation.

Then Aayi looked at Bappa and said, ‘And we had thought of not having him.’Bappa went red in the face. After some stammering, he managed to say, ‘That was all your idea, not mine. Why bring this up now?’ and hid his face in the plate in front of him.

I had to know more. I asked Aayi, and she explained: ‘I had three children already when I became pregnant with you. I thought that was enough, so we went to a doctor in Poona named Madhumalati Gune.’

‘And?’

‘She had said she would be at the clinic, but she wasn’t. We waited an hour and returned.’

‘And then?’

‘And then, nothing. We never went back.’

I was stunned. I was then thirty-five years old. Still, I grew faint at the possibility that the world could have gone on without me in it. For a while, I sat there unaware of my surroundings, considering the idea of my non-existence. A thought struck me. With some bewilderment, I asked about my younger sister: ‘Then, what about Leena…?’

Aayi said, somewhat coyly, ‘Oh, we had stopped thinking of all that by then.’ She burst out laughing. Bappa remained engrossed in the contents of his plate.

Had the doctor arrived at the clinic as promised, these memoirs and their narrator would not have existed. So, I dedicate this autobiography to the memory of the person who made all this possible: Dr Madhumalati Gune.

Girish Karnad

Bangalore, 19 May 2011

45. Scientific Gandhism

Thanks to Gautam Menon, I came across this article in Nature, which makes an interesting case for being self critical of one’s own published work.

Perhaps, this is a good way to go, although much easier said than done. Overall, I strongly support the line of thinking of looking inward and being critical of one’s work.

One of the motivations for writing my blog is to highlight the human element of doing science, and honest mistakes in the pursuit of science are very much part of it.

This is indeed a good culture to inculcate and encourage in a day and age where everything negative and critical is looked down upon as a disadvantage.

The article also reminds me of Peter Medawar’s talk: “Is the scientific paper a fraud?” , which was one of the most refreshing viewpoints on the pursuit of science that I have read. Interestingly, there has been quite a lot of debate on this question, and is worth exploring.

Also there is an element of Gandhism in being truthful to oneself and others, which is refreshing to see in scientific world 🙂