3 ms·

honestly this would be better with an AI model

• teruakohatu 2y ago
  > honestly this would be better with an AI model In the article the author tried Tesseract which uses ML and has some neural network models, and also tried ChatGPT. I have come to the same conclusion as the author when doing OCR that needed 100% accuracy. When you know the font, spacing and the layout is fixed, old school statistical analysis of the pixels works a treat.
  • register 2y ago
    Completely second that. This is my experience as well.
  • Vampiero 2y ago
    You can generalize that to anything: when you know the problem domain so well, why the hell are you using ChatGPT to solve any problem within it? Use the most specialized tool for the job or you're just wasting CPU and memory (and electricity, and money, and time). Same goes for a neural net trained on every possible character set. If you know the font and character size in advance it's way overkill. It's a bit more effort to set up since you actually have to set it up. But at least it's done right.
• secondplacetho 2y ago
  ML is the second best answer to everything, and very rarely the first best answer. Of course it'd be better than something that is intentionally limiting itself. But that says nothing.
• curt15 2y ago
  By "AI model" do you mean neural nets? "AI" or "ML" are just buzzwords that conveys no real meaning about the underlying mathematics. The underlying models could be something as basic as linear or logistic regression, which depending on the application could actually be more appropriate that full-blown neural nets.