4 ms·
Was going to answer this. I very much agree with the article, but deep learning is absolutely a game changer for computer vision. I myself tried several time t
by crubier 5y ago
Was going to answer this. I very much agree with the article, but deep learning is absolutely a game changer for computer vision.
I myself tried several time to “not use ML” for some easy computer vision tasks where traditional CV methods are supposed to work. Well I always end up in situations where they don’t work well without fine parameter tuning, and tuning the parameter for a situation breaks the model in other situations, so you start adding layers of complexity to automatically tune the parameters, but the parameter tuning system also has its own parameters... While a simple neural net is trained easily and is much more robust, saving a lot of time and complexity.
Another proof of that is that CV products only started meaningfully entering the market after ML became applicable to CV (after 2015 for complex tasks, or earlier for simpler stuff like MNIST).
- bushbaba 5y agoTo be fair. Doing that fine parameter tuning and complex layering of heuristics is to some extent creating a “ml model” from hand.
- crubier 5y agoExactly. This is why usually when you reach that point, a red light turns on in your brain saying “you are just reinventing ML at this point, stop”
- oakfr 5y agoThe aerospace industry has been using CV successfully for decades, well before ML appeared. So I would temper your last statement a bit. That being said, you are right to say that ML changed the game entirely for CV in industry at large.
- potatoman22 5y agoSame with industrial inspection.