Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

As far as I can tell, this is let's train a huge number of models and then cherry-pick few that works well on a test set, so an overfitted junk. What have I missed?


It seems like they are cherry picking the one that works well on the training set no? Where did you get the sense that they were doing it on test?


The train is not labeled, so it is not possible; and they do not mention that the labeled set was split or used in validation -- it is just called "test".


"We followed the experimental protocols specified by (Deng et al., 2010; Sanchez & Perronnin, 2011), in which, the datasets are randomly split into two halves for training and validation. We report the performance on the validation set and compare against state-of-theart baselines in Table 2. Note that the splits are not identical to previous work but validation set performances vary slightly across different splits."


As I understand, this is only about this side experiment with ImageNet data which uses logistic regression on those neurons in some cryptic way; I was trying to comprehend the core work (faces) before that.


Well, that's the record breaking bit.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: