3 ms·
>“self supervised learning” which is just a wrong and unhelpful rebranding of existing methodologies What are those methodologies?
by optimalsolver 3y ago
>“self supervised learning” which is just a wrong and unhelpful rebranding of existing methodologies
What are those methodologies?
- loveparade 3y agoSelf-supervised learning is such a trivial concept that it doesn't need a new term. It's just marketing/PR speech to attract attention. You could just call it "generating labels from data" All these stupid new terms of trivial concepts confuse people who are new to the field. That's nothing new though, research has always been like this, people love to make up new phrases that they can own and sell as novel ideas to reviewers, even if they're just trivial renamings. It's nothing more than a PR game.
- optimalsolver 3y agoIf people didn't consider it a useful pointer to a certain set of ideas, it wouldn't have caught on in the ML community. That's how language works.
- ml-anon 3y agoIn the 90’s and 2000’s we called it unsupervised learning. In fact there is a direct formal equivalence between many so-called self supervised learning techniques and matrix factorization. And literally no one would claim that matrix factorisation is anything other than unsupervised. Similarly Yann makes such a big deal about not doing contrastive learning when contrastive methods and his JEPA nonsense can also be shown to be formally equivalent. He’s a grifter like the rest of them. There’s a reason why he basically holds no power at Meta and hasn’t been in charge of AI research there in a long time.