4 ms·
You seem to be exceptionally well funded, and/or have few deadline constraints. Your strategy will only work until you get spammed with "good ideas".
by nonbel 9y ago
You seem to be exceptionally well funded, and/or have few deadline constraints. Your strategy will only work until you get spammed with "good ideas".
- p1esk 9y agoYou seem to be exceptionally well funded, and/or have few deadline constraints I wish! :) you get spammed with "good ideas" Again, I wish! In the subfield I'm focused on at the moment (efficient mapping of NN algorithms to specialized hardware, low precision computation, model compression) I don't see good ideas very often (fewer than one good paper a week). Previously I worked on music generation - also didn't really feel spammed with good ideas.
- nonbel 9y agoI don't mean this to be adversarial, but what exactly is it you do that would not be sped up by checking someone else's results directly before fiddling around and then trying out your own implementation?
- p1esk 9y agoBut that's my point: their results are not that important to me. As an example, recently I saw a paper on NN weight quantization, which had a very interesting idea, but the results were not impressive. I don't remember if they had any code published or not, but it didn't matter - I wanted to see what kind of results I'd get if I implemented it. Turned out it works really well, much better than what they reported in the paper.
- nonbel 9y agoHere is an idea: inverse dropout. How would you implement that?
- p1esk 9y agoLink to paper?
- nonbel 9y agohttp://jmlr.org/papers/v15/srivastava14a.html http://jmlr.org/papers/v15/srivastava14a.html
- p1esk 9y agoYou linked to the original dropout paper. What’s “inverse dropout”?
- nonbel 9y agoIt is just the description of an idea I came up with without any implementation. I was leaving it purposefully vague, just do the "inverse" of what it says in that paper.
- lorenzhs 9y agoThat's not a description of an idea, just like a paper doesn't only consist of the title. This kind of argument is insincere and not helpful at all.