4 ms·
>Visual sharpness at the expense of wider-scale coherence (see: sliding/floating walking woman in Tokyo demo or tiny people next to giant people in Lagos demo)
by famouswaffles 3y ago
>Visual sharpness at the expense of wider-scale coherence (see: sliding/floating walking woman in Tokyo demo or tiny people next to giant people in Lagos demo)
Wider-Scale coherence is still much better than previous models and has consistently been improving. It's not "visual sharpness at the expense of coherence". At worst, the models are learning wider-scale coherence slower.
Not everything is equally difficult to learn so it follows that some aspects will lag behind others. If coherence weren't improving you might have a point but it is so...
- uoaei 3y agoScaling laws operate in the limit but eventually practical considerations dominate. There's a lot we haven't yet fully appreciated about biological vision and cognition -- and indeed, common sense as regards sensible video generation and processing -- that have not made their way into this kind of model. NeRFs are interesting and I hope to see more from that side of things in the coming months and years.
- famouswaffles 3y agoNature is great and all but looking to it as an example of a lack of scaling and brute force is a bit ridiculous. Your vision is hundreds of millions of years in the making.
- uoaei 3y agoYes and in that time we've learned some important lessons that it would be unwise to ignore, e.g. comprehension of 3D geometry despite 2D input visual data.