About SARM. At this point I am 100% convinced that the VGG16 experiment is not for real. Most likely a big experimental mistake, not fraud.
-
Conditional on this interpretation of the algorithm used, there is a 0% chance that performance would be anywhere near backprop for VGG.
I cannot speak for the first two experiments. As for the VGG16 experiment, I am confident enough about this to state it publicly.
-
-
That said. If this paper manages to reignite interest in sparse coding, then that's a positive result. Important, under-appreciated topic.
-
Backprop is computationally inefficient and data-inefficient. In the future we won't be using it. But its replacement has yet to be found.
- Show replies
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.