Eh?  I have spoken my mind plenty of times.  Why can you not stay on the subject?
Put up or shut up guys, forget the snarky comments about AI, forget waffling about FD schemes, what interesting maths should we be using? What problem can you solve differently?

When do you need an answer? 
Snarky comments about AI? not at all.

What is the 'distribution' of your 600 posts? I need a refresher.

Is that your business, Cuch?

Is that your business, Cuch?

It's nice to know who I am speaking to, instead of a nameless avatar. Feels like a gatecrasher.

In discussion forums we speak to nameless avatars, that's the standard. But there are places where you know who you are speaking to.

There's no such thing as "nameless" in the Internet.

Gamal has been traumatised. Leave him alone. I once tried to read “The Handmaid’s Tale.” It was years before I could read another Atwood.

What's the compelling business reason for using 'interesting' mathematics? Aft all, it doesn't grow on trees.

You live in the Netherlands, you must be desperate for something interesting!

Finance is the perfect field for something interesting. I have spoken in lectures about economists having physics envy when it should be the other way around.

You live in the Netherlands, you must be desperate for something interesting!

Finance is the perfect field for something interesting. I have spoken in lectures about economists having physics envy when it should be the other way around.

Physics is mostly hype (string theory almost ruined maths department).
There's nothing stopping people doing interesting maths, but  before they are 25. After that it's Fourier series and linear regression.

 Are you saying that Mathematical Biology doesn't exist? 

Of course it doesn't. There's only some mathematics loosely inspired by the vocabulary of biology. Biologists don't understand it, don't care and are completely right.

Have you read any biology papers recently? There is a lot of mathematics in biology. Statistics is widely used, for one. Population modelling uses mathematical models. Evolutionary biology uses maths.

Metaheuristics?

Eh?  I have spoken my mind plenty of times.  Why can you not stay on the subject?
Put up or shut up guys, forget the snarky comments about AI, forget waffling about FD schemes, what interesting maths should we be using? What problem can you solve differently?

When do you need an answer? 
Snarky comments about AI? not at all.

What is the 'distribution' of your 600 posts? I need a refresher.

What an odd response.  If you want to know the distribution of my posts off you go and count them.

I gave you an example of a new field of mathematics on which finance could embark. Our comments about "AI"/ML are not just snarky, but contain valid and often constructive criticism: insufficient or incorrect theoretical foundations, from those commonly recognised ones (problems with SGD discussed by Cuchulainn, who's an expert in a related field - he doesn't need to prove himself so tone down a bit if you please) to major statistical errors such as confusing observational associations with causal inference from data.

I gave you an example of a new field of mathematics on which finance could embark. Our comments about "AI"/ML are not just snarky, but contain valid and often constructive criticism: insufficient or incorrect theoretical foundations, from those commonly recognised ones (problems with SGD discussed by Cuchulainn, who's an expert in a related field - he doesn't need to prove himself so tone down a bit if you please) to major statistical errors such as confusing observational associations with causal inference from data.

I'm not the one asking people to prove themselves, so it's not me you need to tell to tone it down.

Posting ML afficiandos claim they can solve 100-dimensional PDEs before breakfast is a snarky comment about AI, which nobody has suggested using in this thread.  In fact the only people mentioning AI are those who want to have a grumble about it.

What is this new field you're speaking of, are you referring to "I do simulations of microdynamics of systems of higher complexity than markets."
Why does it have to be a new field?  I just think it's weird that with all these mathematicians and physicists, and 10+ years since the start of the crisis and critiquing of financial models, nobody can say "I'd model X with Y, it's better than a parabolic PDE, or RN valuation or whatever".

Posting ML afficiandos claim they can solve 100-dimensional PDEs before breakfast is a snarky comment about AI, which nobody has suggested using in this thread.  In fact the only people mentioning AI are those who want to have a grumble about it.

It's not snarky, as I have already said. It's BS. Pardon my French. I didn't come down in the last shower. I wrote to the authors of bespoke article TWICE, The algorithm doesn't work. It's snake oil. A first year math undergrad will tell you the same.
Do your homework and you might come to agree with me.

I am a Numerical Analyst  and I see which methods are being used in so-called AI etc. in a recipe manner like what plumbers do. Trial and error to a large extent.
BTW I worked for while with AI in the late 80's and  it was not devoid of hype. The West was trembling that the Japanese would take over the world.

See 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_generation_computer

Anyways, you cannot dictate what people can and cannot write here.  Do you have any ideas yourself?

 That's my feeling. I am happy to be proved even partially wrong.

You live in the Netherlands, you must be desperate for something interesting!

A man who is tired of NL. is tired of life.