6 ms·
It is interesting that the words "production ready" can be used in connection to image classifiers. Google is unarguably the leader of this in the world, and ye
by dmitrygr 9y ago
It is interesting that the words "production ready" can be used in connection to image classifiers. Google is unarguably the leader of this in the world, and yet Google photos search for cats shows me dogs and a search for dogs shows me cats and sometimes rats. We're probably still a few years away from production-ready image classifiers of any sort.
- omalleyt 9y agoGoogle doesn't run those images through a pixel-level ConvNet, Google's algo uses a combo of the HTML info surrounding the image and the image's popularity. Running every image on the web through a CNN would be computationally infeasible ConvNets for image classification (like what the article is about) often achieve better-than-average-human performance
- dmitrygr 9y agoIt DOES run your photos that you store in google photos through (at least according to public statements)
- akvadrako 9y ago> better-than-average-human performance There is false, except under some contrived tests. NNs still aren't very good at handling rotations, can be confused by changing single pixels and often recognise shapes out of complete static.
- tensor 9y agoThe definition of "production ready" for machine learning is when it's at an accuracy level that is high enough that it becomes "useful" for some sense of the word. Machine learning models will almost never achieve 100% accuracy, so it comes down to what a "useful accuracy" level is to you.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]