3 ms·
In order for a model to understand what ugly is, someone or something has to tag training data as “ugly”, I find this to be a complete can of worms
by PUSH_AX 3y ago
In order for a model to understand what ugly is, someone or something has to tag training data as “ugly”, I find this to be a complete can of worms
- Jerrrry 3y ago>In order for a model to understand what ugly is, someone or something has to tag training data as “ugly”, that is a very dated (2008) concept. the model "understands" that 50% of people are below/above median. consequently, those that are not "OMG girl ur BEAUTIFUL"-tagged are horse-faced. It understands that the girl with the profile picture with 200 likes and 2k friends is better looking than the girl with 4 likes and 500 friends.
- PUSH_AX 3y agoI fine tuned some checkpoints this year (2023), and that's exactly how it worked. Unless your model is single focus for humans and faces I find it hard to believe there is specific business logic in the training process around inferring beauty from social engagement. Metas model is general purpose.
- squigz 3y ago> It understands that the girl with the profile picture with 200 likes and 2k friends is better looking than the girl with 4 likes and 500 friends. I'm not very familiar with model training. How does it understand this? Is such information part of the training data?
- Guillaume86 3y agoPut beautiful/pretty in the negative prompt, should get a similar result without the need for tagging ugly in the training set.