>>12305450>Compressed sensing as applied by a CS graduate isn't the same as applied by an engineer, so quit comparing,>applied Dude, I studied recovering noisy measurements which come up in all settings, especially the EE side for obvious reasons.
>guys it isn't the same!Exactly what would the "CS applications" be that are significantly different? This research is on compressed sensing, period, and it gives a method / body of knowledge to the techniques inherent to all parts of engineering that have to do with sensing
>The way you would implement it isn't the same way an ee wouldlmao explain this. Do you really think CS research is about writing muh code and coming to a result using stuff inspired from other fields? Don't you know that a lot of the biggest error correcting code research (namely in locally decodable codes), a classic EE topic, came from the CS departments?
>you just took a common subject applied it in a CS manner I did? News to me. Exactly what is a "CS manner" anyway?
>concluded being an expert in ee signal theorynah, there are definitely things in signal theory I don't know, but I am incredibly confident that I know signal theory as well as any BSEE engineer and as well as anyone who has taken first year grad signals.
>did you build circuits or just write code? The building of circuits is mostly done on PSCAD and Cadence these days, markup languages implemented in software. We had a physical demo yes, but electrical ENGINEERING is done before I hit the solder.
>apply any other ee theory while at it or just CS?What do we qualify as CS vs EE theory here? Communication? Both CS and EE have a storied tradition of studying communication through the transfer of information. CS has a storied tradition of studying randomness extractors while EE has studied recoverable noisy signals. Exactly what's the salient difference between the two here?
Dude, I'm convinced you're early undergrad and actually know nothing you're talking about
