And why would you restrict yourself to the original encoding space and to the Euclidean distance? These are completely arbitrary choices (and completely biased). There's an infinity of possibly encodings of the data you could have chosen, and an infinity of distance functions.https://twitter.com/k_saifullaah/status/1409972975835566081 …
-
-
Saying "I expect the problem to be linearly interpolative in the original encoding space" is equivalent to saying "linear regression with *no* feature engineering is enough to solve any prediction problem." Which we have known to be nonsensical since long before computers existed
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
And why mathematics in physical sciences is unreasonably effective:)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
There is an additional factor: while the function used to describe the data should allow a natural representation of the latent space, the function needs also be efficient to discover, construct, parameterize and represent. (That's why Euclidean representations are ubiquitous.)
-
Absolutely! You can't leverage the latent manifold (or rather, an approximation of it) unless you can represent it (easy part) and learn it (hard part).
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.