Updated and re-written conclusion section, includes ethics

[juancarmona]

Did you add yourself as a contributor if this is your first contribution?

• [x] Yes, I added myself or am already a contributor

Any more details?

[rasbt]

This is a really well written and important section. It's maybe a bit long for "Concluding remarks," and I am wondering if the ethics-related discussion should be it's own (additional) tip category, esp. since it also contains many practical recommendation, I think it could work as a standalone tip.

[juancarmona]

Thanks so much for the kind feedback, @rasbt - hopefully others will also like this new section. I'm open to ideas about how to best incorporate this material. One idea could be to consolidate the ethics into Tip 10 and to re-name it something like "Actively consider the ethical implications of your work." This new section would include the current information about not sharing models trained on sensitive data + my latest content. That'll certainly shrink the conclusion and have all the ethics-themed information live in 1 place. Thoughts/comments? Open to other ideas. @Benjamin-Lee what do you think? Others?

[juancarmona]

Another idea: in the interest of time, we could submit it in the current format and see what reviewers think. We could always re-structure the article downstream. I don't think that the current layout will hurt our chances of getting our manuscript accepted

[agitter]

One idea could be to consolidate the ethics into Tip 10 and to re-name it something like "Actively consider the ethical implications of your work."

@juancarmona I like this idea. Your new text has some active recommendations that would fit well with the main tips content. This ethics section even could stand alone as an 11th tip, but I believe the group consensus was to keep the 10 tip structure.

If we rename and expand the scope of the 10th tip, the overview graphic would need to be updated.

[Benjamin-Lee]

I don't really want an eleventh tip, so let's see if we can slot this in somewhere else. As has been mentioned elsewhere, tip 10 is a fine place. I want to suggest an alternative: merge tip 9 (overinterpretation) with tip 8 (black box) to free up a slot dedicated to ethics. The example in tip 9 seems as if it were drawn from tip 8 (with the model's internal logic learning something it shouldn't), so we could probably consolidate.

[rasbt]

I like the idea of expanding Tip 10 and @juancarmona 's suggested section title ("Actively consider the ethical implications of your work.") would work quite well. Tip 10 is currently also one of the shorter ones, and I think it won't be too long after merging.

Maybe we can keep the last paragraph of @juancarmona 's section, the one starting with

To this end, our manuscript is focused on the promotion of practical tips distilled from cutting-edge insights and evolving professional standards to advance the efficient and optimal application of DL within research.

for the Conclusion section though (perhaps with minor adjustments).

[juancarmona]

@rasbt, I think that's the easiest and most straightforward path. We can always tweak more downstream once this work is under revision. I'll work with @Benjamin-Lee to incorporate these changes and will hopefully have something within next few days

[juancarmona]

@rasbt, @ajlee21 , @agitter: to speed things up, I worked with @Benjamin-Lee to restructure the material as per our conversation here. Thank you all for your input!

[rasbt]

yeah, we can revisit this. I agree, it would be nice to get this submitted to get overall reviewer feedback.

[agitter]

I agree that this pull request may be mature enough to merge, but I don't think we should submit before addressing (minor) issues other co-authors have noted. Especially if we are planning to preprint this article at the time of submission, I suggest polishing it enough to make a strong first impression.

[Benjamin-Lee]

@agitter I agree completely. Filing an issue to track polishing steps