Every once in a while, a paper comes out claiming to get competitive results using only some form of greedy layer-wise training
That's the DL equivalent of cold fusion: it violates what we know on a fundamental level, and overwhelming evidence should be required
-
-
But these papers never provide much evidence or explanations, and seem to take their own claims in strides, unaware of their enormity
-
For the record, DL works because of joint feature learning. You can't get anywhere close to competitive results without it, in some form
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
In supervised and unsupervised? I thought unsupervised layer-wise had some good theory & examples.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.