4 ms·
> While you are right that some feature engineering is needed, there's no reason DL can't be a part of your workflow. I (and, I believe, the earlier poster, to
by fnl 9y ago
> While you are right that some feature engineering is needed, there's no reason DL can't be a part of your workflow.
I (and, I believe, the earlier poster, too) never implied you can't use deep learning on such examples. What we (I think, both) were referring to was the claim that it would absolve you from feature engineering. (Which I understand you also refute.)
> For more of the basics, my book on deep learning might help as well
Congratulations on your book, I know how much hard work that is!
Disclaimer: I make money with deep learning, too... ;-)
- agibsonccc 9y agoA lot of people make money with deep learning with images ;). I guess what I wanted to do was add a bit of nuance. It can help reduce the amount of feature engineering needed. Of course you still need a baseline representation though. More feature engineering also doesn't hurt. I always think of deep learning in the time series context as a neat SVM kernel with some compression built in. With the right tuning it can give you a better representation which you can use with clustering and whatever else you'd like.
- fnl 9y agoI work with language, not images. There, clever feature engineering isn't just better, it's essential to get anything that is production worthy. In fact, it will even be embedded in some expert system process if your system needs to understand very complex relationships. AI around the corner my ass... :-)
- agibsonccc 9y agoAgreed :). Workflow matters a lot more than the hype Sandhill road and google's marketing team are perpetuating. Good on you for making it work in the real world for something outside of vision/speech!