I think if you retain the first part minus Zeilberger’s quote, and then “correlation” sections on frogs and birds, it would make a stronger piece than if you try to salvage the beaver part. Also, “beavers” seem to be more about rigor/foundations/logic (mathematical methodology), not so much computation.
I think if you retain the first part minus Zeilberger’s quote, and then “correlation” sections on frogs and birds, it would make a stronger piece than if you try to salvage the beaver part.
Makes sense—I think I’ll follow your suggestion, just briefly indicating that there may be other categories and referencing Zeilberger and Klein.
I think if you retain the first part minus Zeilberger’s quote, and then “correlation” sections on frogs and birds, it would make a stronger piece than if you try to salvage the beaver part. Also, “beavers” seem to be more about rigor/foundations/logic (mathematical methodology), not so much computation.
Makes sense—I think I’ll follow your suggestion, just briefly indicating that there may be other categories and referencing Zeilberger and Klein.