3 ms·
Reminds me of the algorithm from a Canticle for Leibowitz one of the monks was working on. I do have to wonder if things like this do more harm than good. A gue
by knolax 7y ago
Reminds me of the algorithm from a Canticle for Leibowitz one of the monks was working on. I do have to wonder if things like this do more harm than good. A guess done by deep learning is still just a guess, the difference being the additional danger of it looking more authoritive and certain than it is.
- Ftuuky 7y agoI'm not a DL or ancient greek expert but it seems their NN outputs top20 predictions, so it's more an assistant suggesting characters/words than an authoritative thing. If it helps academicians restoring ancient texts in a way that is faster and with less errors, where is the harm?
- shakna 7y agoIt seems like this particular alogrithm has two main components that are highly important, and human-oriented: a) The search space is limited with human-supplied options. b) The output isn't deterministic, is offers a series of best guesses. I would say this is closer to a NN-powered spellchecker than an authoritative source on the restoration of the work. It still requires a decent amount of interaction from an actual expert for the system to work.