3 ms·
There's literally a link to a repository of papers in the article: http://techlab.bu.edu/resources/articles/C5.html http://techlab.bu.edu/resources/articles/C5.
by masswerk 5y ago
There's literally a link to a repository of papers in the article: http://techlab.bu.edu/resources/articles/C5.html http://techlab.bu.edu/resources/articles/C5.html
- PeterisP 5y agoThe latest paper there is from 2009 which is before the popularity rise of deep learning, before the creation of key methods of modern deep learning, and before the creation of most key datasets on which we would nowadays evaluate and compare the advantages and drawbacks of different methods. Literally nothing in that repository makes an argument that this method is better than deep learning in any aspect whatsoever, they don't even attempt such a comparison.
- masswerk 5y agoAt least, there can be found some on the theory and methods. Regarding a direct comparison, it may be difficult to do such a comparison by just running some code on data sets, which the one group of algorithms has been heavily optimized for with excessive funding, while the other has been not. Even more so, as such a review would have a difficult time to asses any of the critical features, like chances of memory loss. Comparing technologies isn't as easy as running them side by side.
- natch 5y agoNice reddit-esque attempt to use “literally” in an irrelevant context, but PDFs are not code.