alexlikeits1999

4 ms·

1.
by alexlikeits1999 1y ago
I've gone through the link you posted and the o1 system card and can't see any reference to IMO. Are you sure they were referring to IMO or were they referring to AIME?
2.
by alexlikeits1999 6y ago
Sorry, car accidents won't cut it. Here are the life tables: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_03.pdf which link to this spreadsheet: https://ftp.cdc.gov/pub/Heal
3.
by alexlikeits1999 7y ago
The best thing I've read about cross-country longevity, and I don't even care about its main point (ie USA healthcare spending). If you have a Patreon account or something similar please post it. I want more of this.
4.
by alexlikeits1999 7y ago
This is from DeepMind. They rarely release source code at the time that the paper is submitted/published. They often release source code later on. While not ideal it seems like a billion times better than the situation where they don&#
5.
by alexlikeits1999 8y ago
You don't have to provide them with your real name. Also, I work in genomics and am a 23andme customer/product (although I was the latter before I the former became true).
6.
by alexlikeits1999 8y ago
Thank you very much for that first link. It seems to be severely under-publicised considering the huge amount of exposure that the topic gets. Do you happen to know if rs1229984 is linked to any particular group that could make this result
7.
by alexlikeits1999 8y ago
That's the list and figure for women. For men you have to see the next graph which is slightly different. Then the next two graphs show you that outside of the US the opiod epidemic is not a big part of the reason. Then when you look a
8.
by alexlikeits1999 9y ago
While I agree with the general sentiment that CR is probably not very useful for humans, I think you are either misinformed or exaggerating for the sake of generating a response. Ad-libitum feeding is not force feeding. Noone goes and shove
9.
by alexlikeits1999 9y ago
That first paragraph is pretty deceptive. They are not comparing against the results from GATK 1.0.
10.
by alexlikeits1999 9y ago
Just a nitpick, but the original didn't do better than human scores. It does better than their human panel, who seem to suck at space invaders and a whole bunch of other games. In general DQN does worse than expected at space invaders
11.
Analysis of longevity of code across many popular projects(erikbern.com)
202 points by alexlikeits1999 10y ago|51 comments
12.
by alexlikeits1999 11y ago
Changing the frameskip is not needed any more since the implementation does max of last two frames before processing (same as what DeepMind does) EDIT: talking about Sprague's implementation btw, not necessarily OPs.
13.
by alexlikeits1999 11y ago
Regarding the expectation that it would have gone 5-0 or 4-1 to either one, you'd have to have equally predicted a similarly one-sided result in the Deep Blue v Kasparov match. Rate of improvement might end up being completely domain-d
14.
by alexlikeits1999 11y ago
Another explanation is that people with bad livers can't handle coffee (slow to break it down), so this is just selection-bias.
15.
by alexlikeits1999 12y ago
Nathan Sprague has a mostly-working implementation at https://github.com/spragunr/deep_q_rl