look at this stupid article i found
Re: look at this stupid article i found
good article (though i am no expert in machine learning). i wonder if it will have any impact
(ps: paging juice)
(ps: paging juice)
u gotta skate
-
- her skirt got quite a lot smaller,
but her heart is still the same
size it was before - Posts: 12359
- Joined: Jun 13, 2018
Re: look at this stupid article i found
hahahahahahahahah wowFor instance, when ProPublica journalists tried to explain what was in the proprietary COMPAS model for recidivism prediction (Angwin et al., 2016), they seem to have mistakenly assumed that if one could create a linear model that approximated COMPAS and depended on race, age, and criminal history, that COMPAS itself must depend on race.
-
- .
How'd you know that loving kittens is my one defining trait? - Posts: 11770
- Joined: Sep 03, 2018
Re: look at this stupid article i found
Teach statistics in school until school is good
wow, [you]. that all sounds terrible. i hope it gets better for you
-
- her skirt got quite a lot smaller,
but her heart is still the same
size it was before - Posts: 12359
- Joined: Jun 13, 2018
Re: look at this stupid article i found
then ban school and you're done
-
- .
How'd you know that loving kittens is my one defining trait? - Posts: 11770
- Joined: Sep 03, 2018
Re: look at this stupid article i found
No, we still need universal daycare
wow, [you]. that all sounds terrible. i hope it gets better for you
-
- her skirt got quite a lot smaller,
but her heart is still the same
size it was before - Posts: 12359
- Joined: Jun 13, 2018
Re: look at this stupid article i found
universal daycare will be provided by the woods
-
- .
How'd you know that loving kittens is my one defining trait? - Posts: 11770
- Joined: Sep 03, 2018
Re: look at this stupid article i found
OK we're ready to roll
wow, [you]. that all sounds terrible. i hope it gets better for you
Re: look at this stupid article i found
Send them to the ranch
It's your turn in Cthulhu Wars
It's your turn in Squirrel Wars
It's your turn in Demon Wars
It's your turn in Wall Street Wars
http://devilsbiscuit.com/
It's your turn in Squirrel Wars
It's your turn in Demon Wars
It's your turn in Wall Street Wars
http://devilsbiscuit.com/
Re: look at this stupid article i found
"The belief that accuracy must be sacrificed for interpretability is inaccurate."Skeletor wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2020 1:18 am I think a lot of you would like this article about the Explainable Machine Learning Competition, which is a really fascinating thing to exist
https://hdsr.mitpress.mit.edu/pub/f9kuryi8
No! It's not! I can fucking prove it's not! Shannon gave us the tools to do that 70 years ago.
The article misses the point completely. A complicated neural net is a black box not because the dastardly and lazy scientists failed to include visualization tools, but because it is complicated. It has high data entropy.
I am going to explain using the groundbreaking work of this young scientist right here:
A bunch of marbles falling down stairs is a good analogy for how a neural net works. All the marbles bounce and hit and influence each other's movement in complicated ways, much like how the nodes in the network do.
Now, imagine someone watches all the marbles fall down, and then asks you "why did this particular marble end up right there? explain this to me."
The only real answer is "because of how all the marbles moved," which is a non-answer. But any simpler answer is going to be incomplete. You can say "well, it's because this other marble struck it from the side at this moment, which pushed it off course", but then you'll have to answer two more questions: why that other marble did that, and why the original marble was in the right spot to be hit by it. And when you're done with the entire set of cascading causal chains, you'll get the truly impossible question: "what do I need to do if I want things to mostly work the same, but I'd like that marble to end up on the opposite side of the staircase?"
There is no possible useful answer to this, because the entire marble system (much like convolutional nerual nets) is interconnected. There is too much information contained in the system for a human mind to ever comprehend, and because it's a chaotic system, any attempt to provide a simplified model (e.g. only looking at the five fastest-moving marbles) will give you false conclusions.
Re: look at this stupid article i found
I do agree with the broader point that interpretability is very useful, though, and even worth sacrificing some accuracy for. And I agree that this is a very useful and underappreciated avenue of research. And I agree that black boxes are overused, even for problems that do not require them (and it would appear that the problem set in the competition did not require or necessarily benefit from such an approach.)
-
- .
How'd you know that loving kittens is my one defining trait? - Posts: 11770
- Joined: Sep 03, 2018
Re: look at this stupid article i found
I don't think they were claiming that's true in principal, I thought they were claiming it's true in practice with current tools
wow, [you]. that all sounds terrible. i hope it gets better for you
Re: look at this stupid article i found
Well, at the conclusion of the article, there are these two sentences:
"Let us insist that we do not use black box machine learning models for high-stakes decisions unless no interpretable model can be constructed that achieves the same level of accuracy."
Agreed!
"It is possible that an interpretable model can always be constructed—we just have not been trying."
This is provably wrong! ("Always" is a very strong word.) But yes, it is possible that such a model can often or usually be constructed for real-world problems.
"Let us insist that we do not use black box machine learning models for high-stakes decisions unless no interpretable model can be constructed that achieves the same level of accuracy."
Agreed!
"It is possible that an interpretable model can always be constructed—we just have not been trying."
This is provably wrong! ("Always" is a very strong word.) But yes, it is possible that such a model can often or usually be constructed for real-world problems.
Re: look at this stupid article i found
I think the real problem is that people fetishize "black box" solutions. They assume that because they're so complicated that no human can understand them, therefore they must be a better solution. Black box solutions can also be very shitty, in addition to being super complicated!
Re: look at this stupid article i found
Oh, I didn't fully understand your point at first. Yes, in that case I agree. The theoretical optimal solution is usually gonna be "black box", for unavoidable information-theory reasons. But we can't normally achieve or even approach that solution, so this doesn't mean that the black box solutions available to us are gonna be better than interpretable models. I get it now. You're right!
Re: look at this stupid article i found
https://reductress.com/post/love-someth ... ually-bad/ arti this made me think of you
u gotta skate
Re: look at this stupid article i found
Bugger!
From: vicious_bastard
Subject: crippled masters
Bring on the kung-fu amputees - no arms vs. no legs anyone? A bit of high-speed underground ninja-tunneling is always good as well. I wanna see some shit like that. Crazy monks with gnarly special powers can make any film good. FACT.
-
- Posting Automaton
- Posts: 2520
- Joined: Jun 24, 2020
Re: look at this stupid article i found
you should interpret their statement as being about "the kind of problems we actually deal with" and not about every possible labelling problem, because for almost all possible labelling problems neural nets wouldn't work, they just happen to work for a lot of the ones that we actually care aboutAshenai wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2020 8:19 am"The belief that accuracy must be sacrificed for interpretability is inaccurate."Skeletor wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2020 1:18 am I think a lot of you would like this article about the Explainable Machine Learning Competition, which is a really fascinating thing to exist
https://hdsr.mitpress.mit.edu/pub/f9kuryi8
No! It's not! I can fucking prove it's not! Shannon gave us the tools to do that 70 years ago.
The article misses the point completely. A complicated neural net is a black box not because the dastardly and lazy scientists failed to include visualization tools, but because it is complicated. It has high data entropy.
I am going to explain using the groundbreaking work of this young scientist right here:
A bunch of marbles falling down stairs is a good analogy for how a neural net works. All the marbles bounce and hit and influence each other's movement in complicated ways, much like how the nodes in the network do.
Now, imagine someone watches all the marbles fall down, and then asks you "why did this particular marble end up right there? explain this to me."
The only real answer is "because of how all the marbles moved," which is a non-answer. But any simpler answer is going to be incomplete. You can say "well, it's because this other marble struck it from the side at this moment, which pushed it off course", but then you'll have to answer two more questions: why that other marble did that, and why the original marble was in the right spot to be hit by it. And when you're done with the entire set of cascading causal chains, you'll get the truly impossible question: "what do I need to do if I want things to mostly work the same, but I'd like that marble to end up on the opposite side of the staircase?"
There is no possible useful answer to this, because the entire marble system (much like convolutional nerual nets) is interconnected. There is too much information contained in the system for a human mind to ever comprehend, and because it's a chaotic system, any attempt to provide a simplified model (e.g. only looking at the five fastest-moving marbles) will give you false conclusions.
and arguments about shannon entropy are completely beyond the point, because machine learning is not "you get the largest hypothesis class possible, and then pick the best hypothesis in it" - neural nets (and conv nets even more so) are restricted hypothesis classes for which we have algorithms that in practice tend to give good results
-
- Posting Automaton
- Posts: 2520
- Joined: Jun 24, 2020
Re: look at this stupid article i found
oh lol apparently it's been a minute since you posted that, oops
Re: look at this stupid article i found
u gotta skate
-
- Posting Automaton
- Posts: 2520
- Joined: Jun 24, 2020
Re: look at this stupid article i found
choosing to believe that this means that all of them performed All Star by Smashmouth
u gotta skate
Re: look at this stupid article i found
Oh man I wish
It's your turn in Cthulhu Wars
It's your turn in Squirrel Wars
It's your turn in Demon Wars
It's your turn in Wall Street Wars
http://devilsbiscuit.com/
It's your turn in Squirrel Wars
It's your turn in Demon Wars
It's your turn in Wall Street Wars
http://devilsbiscuit.com/
Re: look at this stupid article i found
u gotta skate
-
- "I don’t believe that we will lose life or have to discard cards ourselves."
- Posts: 4489
- Joined: Nov 30, 2019
Re: look at this stupid article i found
lol @ the maryland and colorado onesCrunchums wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 9:02 pm https://www.theonion.com/most-frequent- ... 1848237193 (NSFW image)
Re: look at this stupid article i found
Clickhole is good at making me say "what the fuck"
u gotta skate
Re: look at this stupid article i found
https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2022/3/7/ ... sive-backs
what, like between 105.7 and 105.8 MHz there's secretly 105.ה?the NFL obtained an exclusive, secret frequency from the FCC in 2016 that enabled better-protected communication
u gotta skate
Re: look at this stupid article i found
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mexico-sku ... ce-ad-900/When Mexican police found a pile of about 150 skulls in a cave near the Guatemalan border, they thought they were looking at a crime scene, and took the bones to the state capital.
It turns out it was a very cold case.
It took a decade of tests and analysis to determine the skulls were from sacrificial victims killed between A.D. 900 and 1200, the National Institute of Anthropology and History said Wednesday.
It's your turn in Cthulhu Wars
It's your turn in Squirrel Wars
It's your turn in Demon Wars
It's your turn in Wall Street Wars
http://devilsbiscuit.com/
It's your turn in Squirrel Wars
It's your turn in Demon Wars
It's your turn in Wall Street Wars
http://devilsbiscuit.com/
Re: look at this stupid article i found
I don't know how accurate this is but it's a fun readSo you’ve heard about how fish aren’t a monophyletic group? You’ve heard about carcinization, the process by which ocean arthropods convergently evolve into crabs? You say you get it now? Sit down. Sit down. Shut up. Listen. You don’t know nothing yet.
“Trees” are not a coherent phylogenetic category. On the evolutionary tree of plants, trees are regularly interspersed with things that are absolutely, 100% not trees. This means that, for instance, either:
The common ancestor of a maple and a mulberry tree was not a tree.
The common ancestor of a stinging nettle and a strawberry plant was a tree.
And this is true for most trees or non-trees that you can think of.
I thought I had a pretty good guess at this, but the situation is far worse than I could have imagined.
https://eukaryotewritesblog.com/2021/05 ... as-a-tree/
It's your turn in Cthulhu Wars
It's your turn in Squirrel Wars
It's your turn in Demon Wars
It's your turn in Wall Street Wars
http://devilsbiscuit.com/
It's your turn in Squirrel Wars
It's your turn in Demon Wars
It's your turn in Wall Street Wars
http://devilsbiscuit.com/