If you are doing engineering, then it better to follow engineering best practices, with descriptive names. If you are doing science, it's better to follow science best practices.

For example, we have two competing coordinate systems: first is x // width, y // height, z // depth, and second is x // width, y // depth, z // height. With descriptive names we will have no such problem.

However, it's much easier to load large and complex algorithm into head if it written concisely: one letter per variable or function, minimum unnecessary separators. When I need to understand someone else codebase, I will often concatenate all files, delete all comments and obvious functions (getters, setters, eq, hash, etc.), abbreviate long names via search and replace, remove unnecessary symbols and convert functions and classes into oneliners, until I will see whole algorithm at once. However, reading of such code requires some additional training.

To summarize, it's possible and is easy to convert descriptive names into abbreviations, so, it's better to stick with descriptive naming in public interfaces.