Really interesting paper exploring adversarial inputs to ML models: https://arxiv.org/abs/1905.02175
They conclude:
* It's a property of the input data, not the training
* You can even train a model on non-robust features and obtain a model that works well on the original input data!
miniblog.
Related Posts
Is there a good term for "after using this feature we realised that the best design is different from the current design"?
In casual conversation I generally hear "bug" but there was nothing wrong with the original implementation.
I'm changing method definition syntax in my language:
// old
fun (this: Int) inc(): Int { this + 1 }
// new
method inc(this: Int): Int { this + 1 }
The original syntax was inspired by Go, but the new syntax is more grep-friendly and perhaps more readable. Not sure about the verbosity though. Thoughts?
The games console market is fascinating: there's incentive to *not* provide upgraded models.
You want the guarantee that a game for $X just works on any $X purchased.
E.g. the Switch OLED has a bigger screen, and a better CPU than the original, but it's downclocked to match the original Switch's CPU.
