3 ms·

It's curious to see that they chose ResNet50 as an architecture. Although there was EfficientNet mentioned in the References. No word on frameworks, although t

by truth_ 5y ago

It's curious to see that they chose ResNet50 as an architecture. Although there was EfficientNet mentioned in the References. No word on frameworks, although they used GradCAMs for Keras/TF. So, I am guessing Keras. They are using voting. And achieving 98% accuracy in 10 votes. Is the model overfit? This might be novel in archaelogy, but this is a very very easy task to perform for a DL practitioner. But they took their time to read a lot about ML interpretablity, tSNE, transferable features, etc and they cited them. Wanted to be rigorous.

AlotOfReading 5y ago
Archaeologists aren't always the most technically adept people. This is just a demonstration paper to promote acceptance of ML techniques in the somewhat conservative field of southwestern archeology. I'm not a big fan of this paper, but they made a good attempt to address reasonable concerns.
- truth_ 5y ago
  > but they made a good attempt to address reasonable concerns. I am guessing that, too. It is weird how you can do extremely easy things in a field of application that is novel to the method and get huge amount of praise. I bet they will be called to speak on many archaelogy conferences to talk about it. I am not jealous at all. And I truly respect the people behind the paper for doing something that no one else is doing. They are at least doing something new. And they deserve praise from people in their fields.
  - AlotOfReading 5y ago
    It's a well-known criticism among archaeologists of our field that we tend to borrow a lot more methodologies than we export to other disciplines, so this case isn't unique. There's been a lot of interest in ML applications, but personally as a former archeologist now working at an ML-heavy company in the bay, I'm a bit more skeptical. Just my 2c though.
jonnycomputer 5y ago
I'd have included comparisons with other ML models, even something simple like SVM.

by truth_ 5y ago

AlotOfReading 5y ago

Archaeologists aren't always the most technically adept people. This is just a demonstration paper to promote acceptance of ML techniques in the somewhat conservative field of southwestern archeology. I'm not a big fan of this paper, but they made a good attempt to address reasonable concerns.

truth_ 5y ago
> but they made a good attempt to address reasonable concerns. I am guessing that, too. It is weird how you can do extremely easy things in a field of application that is novel to the method and get huge amount of praise. I bet they will be called to speak on many archaelogy conferences to talk about it. I am not jealous at all. And I truly respect the people behind the paper for doing something that no one else is doing. They are at least doing something new. And they deserve praise from people in their fields.
- AlotOfReading 5y ago
  It's a well-known criticism among archaeologists of our field that we tend to borrow a lot more methodologies than we export to other disciplines, so this case isn't unique. There's been a lot of interest in ML applications, but personally as a former archeologist now working at an ML-heavy company in the bay, I'm a bit more skeptical. Just my 2c though.

jonnycomputer 5y ago

I'd have included comparisons with other ML models, even something simple like SVM.