4 ms·
But then you aren't really throwing "random noise" at it are you? It's more like you are throwing generated data sets with abstract structures at it, and use th
by vanderZwan 5y ago
But then you aren't really throwing "random noise" at it are you? It's more like you are throwing generated data sets with abstract structures at it, and use the randomization part to ensure that it does not overfit on other accidental structures that might be in an individual image, because the randomization ensures that there are no other structures to speak of in the "average" (which does sound like a very sensible way to train a network on abstract structures). Or do I misunderstand the method here?
- l33tman 5y agoI'm pretty sure the title is clickbait, it's not uncorrelated random per-pixel noise as it gives the impression of.
- vanderZwan 5y agoOh for sure, and I don't mean to accuse the authors; if pop-sci articles spread confusion about their work that's not their fault. I just want to clear things up for myself