AI & Data Science Master’s Programmes in the Netherlands
mohammadi-hadi/ai-masters-netherlands · MIT
Field notes on building and evaluating language-model systems, written from production work and from research, plus the open guides I keep up to date for people studying AI and data science. Everything here is free to read, takes corrections by pull request, and is archived with a DOI so it can be cited.
Short empirical pieces, usually built around one measurement on public data: what an LLM judge does when nobody is checking, what a benchmark’s annotation layer looks like underneath, how small a gap a benchmark can resolve, what a model means when it says it is 95% sure. Each one comes with the code that produced its numbers.
A leaderboard is a ranked list, and the ranked list is what everyone reads. On the public LMArena sample, the votes separate one neighbouring pair out of 54.
A sliding window at 2,048 tokens has the supporting turn in front of the model for 8% of 1,527 questions. Searching the transcript first takes that to 60% for the same money.
Three local models answered 1,000 MMLU questions each and rated their own confidence from 0 to 100. In 3,000 answers, a number under 80 came up eight times.
HumanEval catches a true three-point gap about one time in seven. The floor for five familiar benchmarks, worked out from their item counts.
A circulating simulation of a simplified watermark puts detection at roughly two hundred words. The arithmetic checks out. What it assumes about prose does not.
211,225 crowd ratings sit under GoEmotions. On 27 of its 28 emotions, the raw annotation layer falls below the reliability floor the field normally requires.
Three local models graded the same arithmetic, with one answer provably correct. One picked whichever answer was shown first 91% of the time.
Six chapters on the stack I use daily, from calling models well to serving them cheaply, with the trade-offs stated plainly and the failure modes named. They come from shipping LLM systems in production, mostly matching, ranking and content generation for a recruitment marketplace, and from doctoral research on explainable NLP and LLM evaluation.
Each chapter stands alone. If you already build with LLMs, start with Evaluation: it is the discipline most teams add last and need first.
Structured outputs, streaming, retries, caching and cost control: the unglamorous 80%.
Chunking, hybrid search, rerankers, and how RAG actually fails.
Tool loops, the Model Context Protocol, and when not to build an agent.
Prompting vs. RAG vs. LoRA vs. DPO/GRPO: a decision guide, then the mechanics.
The chapter closest to my research: evals that predict production, judges you can trust.
vLLM, quantization, KV caches, and latency and cost budgets that hold.
These are living documents rather than posts: lists and paths that only stay useful if somebody maintains them. Each one has its own repository, checks its links weekly, and takes corrections by issue or pull request.
mohammadi-hadi/ai-masters-netherlands · MIT
mohammadi-hadi/ml-summer-schools-europe · MIT
mohammadi-hadi/ml-learning-paths · MIT
mohammadi-hadi/awesome-explainable-nlp · CC0 1.0
Opening the Black Box is a free self-paced course in explainable AI for large language models: thirteen labs that run in the browser. The same material is taught as a five-day summer school for universities and teams. The playground lets you poke at a model’s explanations without writing any code.
NL Student Support is a separate free directory I maintain of the support services at 49 Dutch higher education institutions: psychologists, counsellors, study advisers, disability and financial support.
Weekend Learning is the LinkedIn newsletter that goes with this blog: one issue each Saturday, built around one post or one package from here, with an exercise you can finish in about an hour.
Corrections and additions to any of this are welcome as an issue or a pull request on the repository. New writing appears in the RSS feed.