2 ms·
It makes a certain sort of sense - if a person's torso isn't connected to their legs, it's not very person shaped, is it. I'd agree it's surprising, just that
by RugnirViking 8y ago
It makes a certain sort of sense - if a person's torso isn't connected to their legs, it's not very person shaped, is it.
I'd agree it's surprising, just that thinking about it you can see where it goes wrong. I imagine combining this with some kind of makeup to change the contours of one's face would work wonders.
- lordnacho 8y ago> if a person's torso isn't connected to their legs, it's not very person shaped, is it. I suppose it really depends on the training set. In some sense the set can be misleading. For instance if I have a load of pictures of people sitting by a table with their legs visible, that model might actually require a gap between your torso and your legs.
- RugnirViking 8y agoThat's true. In fact in the video, the man's lower legs are obscured by the chair and this poses little problem for the system. However, I would say that if this was all that were required, they would have used a blank square. Instead, they provide cues that mess with the system's sense of scale, by having almost like a window into another, smaller scene, with vague, human-like images that the network presumably recognises as faces. A group of tiny faces on the top of a single set of legs very much does not look like a human.