4 ms·

Seems like they are using this to get a proper referral to a specialist rather than using this as sole diagnosis. The code itself is probably 15 lines using Ten

Seems like they are using this to get a proper referral to a specialist rather than using this as sole diagnosis. The code itself is probably 15 lines using Tensorflow or other framework I'm guessing, but could be wrong.

monkeynotes 9y ago
If it is that simple I am wasting my time in my current job.
- Larrikin 9y ago
  I got a book on TF last year and saw all the examples were fairly short and was impressed with the power. However it took me a good three months before I could reason about why reach line was there. It's pretty complex stuff that takes a while to even understand, let alone actually write.
  - monkeynotes 9y ago
    After I wrote the above comment I remembered that just because there are few lines of code doesn't mean it's trivial to compose those actual lines. Some of the most elegant code is terse, but it takes years of education, experience, and intelligence to be able to produce that logic.
    - opportune 9y ago
      A lot of machine learning in particular is like that. The best practitioners have very strong intuitive understandings of the data and the modeling problem, which is what allows them to construct effective models (wrt capacity, training algorithm, topology, use of certain optional training procedure additions). I would liken their job to that of a doctor writing a prescription: it doesn't take much to write the prescription itself, but it takes mastery to be able to analyze the problem and write the best prescription
- mickronome 9y ago
  The algorithm could be simple. Evaluating all failure cases, analysing them, and getting the whole lot approved certainly isn't simple.
amelius 9y ago
In that case, shouldn't the training data be open source? Seems like somebody got an unfair advantage here.
- maxerickson 9y ago
  In that case, the training data is the product. They intentionally built an unfair advantage so that they could sell it.
- arfar 9y ago
  Oddly enough that's what they're aiming to claim a monopoly over. Here's[1] a patent they have filed towards the system. Claims 1-18 and 20 are focused on the training of the neural network. Looks like Claims 1-18 are going to be granted soon largely in that form also from looking at PAIR[2]. [1] https://patents.google.com/patent/US20160292856A1/en?q=AI,artificial+intelligence&assignee=Idx https://patents.google.com/patent/US20160292856A1/en?q=AI,ar... [2] https://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair https://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair

monkeynotes 9y ago

If it is that simple I am wasting my time in my current job.

Larrikin 9y ago
I got a book on TF last year and saw all the examples were fairly short and was impressed with the power. However it took me a good three months before I could reason about why reach line was there. It's pretty complex stuff that takes a while to even understand, let alone actually write.
- monkeynotes 9y ago
  After I wrote the above comment I remembered that just because there are few lines of code doesn't mean it's trivial to compose those actual lines. Some of the most elegant code is terse, but it takes years of education, experience, and intelligence to be able to produce that logic.
  - opportune 9y ago
    A lot of machine learning in particular is like that. The best practitioners have very strong intuitive understandings of the data and the modeling problem, which is what allows them to construct effective models (wrt capacity, training algorithm, topology, use of certain optional training procedure additions). I would liken their job to that of a doctor writing a prescription: it doesn't take much to write the prescription itself, but it takes mastery to be able to analyze the problem and write the best prescription
mickronome 9y ago
The algorithm could be simple. Evaluating all failure cases, analysing them, and getting the whole lot approved certainly isn't simple.

amelius 9y ago

In that case, shouldn't the training data be open source? Seems like somebody got an unfair advantage here.

maxerickson 9y ago
In that case, the training data is the product. They intentionally built an unfair advantage so that they could sell it.
arfar 9y ago
Oddly enough that's what they're aiming to claim a monopoly over. Here's[1] a patent they have filed towards the system. Claims 1-18 and 20 are focused on the training of the neural network. Looks like Claims 1-18 are going to be granted soon largely in that form also from looking at PAIR[2]. [1] https://patents.google.com/patent/US20160292856A1/en?q=AI,artificial+intelligence&assignee=Idx https://patents.google.com/patent/US20160292856A1/en?q=AI,ar... [2] https://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair https://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair