3 ms·
Yes, and that's the right thing to do in the academic research setting ("advance the state of the art"). But the public competitions with monetary rewards are n
by sytelus 7y ago
Yes, and that's the right thing to do in the academic research setting ("advance the state of the art"). But the public competitions with monetary rewards are not the same setting. I can imagine scenarios where the guy stole the test set from Kaggle servers (i.e. unlawful access) should disqualify him permanently. But the essence of the competition should be the focus on cracking a given problem, not about a specific technique.
One test a good of ML competition: Can it be solved by simply hiring lots of humans to make predictions without incurring significantly more costs than the prize money?
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- joe_the_user 7y agoOne test a good of ML competition: Can it be solved by simply hiring lots of humans to make predictions without incurring significantly more costs than the prize money? What value to the organizers, to society or to whatever are you imagining coming out of a free-for-all style competition? I think the organizers now imagine that the result would identifying good, generic prediction algorithms along with identifying good AI programmers capable of producing general prediction algorithms. It seems like the contest framework already has become a bit problematic through context winners just being good at contests and not otherwise achieving anything. But what are you thinking of? There are already hacking competitions btw.