3 ms·
>Can you honestly say with a straight face that there is no theory behind why convnets are the right choice? There is theory of convnets, but it's more of a po
by gambler 8y ago
>Can you honestly say with a straight face that there is no theory behind why convnets are the right choice?
There is theory of convnets, but it's more of a post-factum analysis, really, and I'm not sure it's behind much of anything at this point. Researchers use convnets because they work in ways that work for them.
Theory: 109 citations.
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/A-Mathematical-Theory-of-Deep-Convolutional-Neural-Wiatowski-Bx00F6lcskei/4043604116f90200c3b7cc7573a133349a24bb78?navId=citing-papers https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/A-Mathematical-Theory-...
Practice: 42,551 citations.
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ImageNet-Classification-with-Deep-Convolutional-Krizhevsky-Sutskever/2315fc6c2c0c4abd2443e26a26e7bb86df8e24cc?navId=citing-papers https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ImageNet-Classificatio...
- dnautics 8y ago> Researchers use convnets because they work in ways that work for them. What about the first person who made a convnet? This is basically like saying there is no understanding of the wheel since there are relatively few citations on the theory of the wheel relative to papers that use wheels.
- zazen 8y agoThe first person who made a convnet had an intuition. That is to say, an informal heuristic that gave him reasonable grounds to suppose it might work. This is not "theory". You do not understand what "theory" means in an academic context.