I like this suggestion. One thing that would worry me is whether I will be able to remove a layer and not end up with a piece that really looks badly chiseled. I think the dye on the most offering pieces is just a layer on top. This gives me some hope. The grey and beige "stones" seem to have the dye all throughout. Have you tried sandblasting? Any experience with how it will look at the end?

good point. It is front and center afterall.

I think it is really a cement mix so this would work you are right. Thanks!

Somehow I failed to upload the picture. Here it is: https://imgur.com/a/Fb9uv2r

Bonding agent is a good idea. I was also thinking of cutting some grooves into the slab for added adhesion too. Thanks! I've been toi Australia once. Loved it despite being reminded that everything there can kill you :) We were around Cairns.

thank you. I understand and agree that would be a quicker fix with immediate results. I'm looking for a more permanent solution. Already committed to tiles (bought them). let's see if this turns out to a major mistake at the end where I "fix" it, and then have to pay for someone to remove the mess I create, and really fix it :)

Thank you for the suggestions.

I hope these are appropriate questions to ask (still trying to learn how to abide by the forum's rules ):

Mortar wise, what do you think about reinforcing it with wire mesh? Any mortar will do or would you recommend some particular mix (not looking for a brand here -- the type),. Structurally strong concrete mixes seem to need 5" to 7" thickness which we cannot do here (I see your point about redoing the whole thing is the right approach).

Would adding a cement board on top of the mortar be a good idea? I am thinking this would reduce how thick the mortar needs to be and maybe it can help avoid crumbling in the long run. Or this is half assing it to the square :)

Thanks!

I second this adding that "reviewer roulette" is now the norm in other research communities too. Some conferences are making an effort to impriove the reviewing process, e.g., ICML has metareviewers and an open back-and-forth discussion between the authors and the reviewers. Still, it has not solved the problem.

​

Regarding your work, If possible, define a metric that encapsulates accuracy vs. cost (memory and compute), show how this varies across different established models, and then use that as part of your case: why is your model much more "efficient" than the alternative of running X models in parallel.

In my experience, using a proxy metric for cost is preferable for the ML crowd. I mean something like operation counts and bits transferred. Of course, if you can measure time on existing hardware, say a GPU or CPU that would be best.

Good luck!