Re: Raj's response to authors response
The problem is that they fail to address his actual criticism which is not that it is learning about specific main shock's relationship with aftershocks, but that it is learning what that relationship is is specific regions so is not generalisable to other places.
In fact his own testing shows that if you run it properly its no better than existing techniques.
A secondary issue is that they fail to mention that a much computationally much lighter ML does as well as deep learning.
He highlights other methodological issues too.
They do not seem to get it even after he explains.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
