Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚑ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

100% Positive

Analyzed from 97 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#accuracy#mnist#cifar#imagenet#backprop#different#https#sakana#sigh#better

Discussion (5 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

cs702β€’about 2 hours ago
~85% accuracy on MNIST. Sigh.

How does it do on CIFAR-10, or even better, ImageNet?

Interesting research, not sure it's a backprop alternative.

===

EDIT: accuracy on MNIST is not ~90%. It's ~85%.

Lercβ€’about 1 hour ago
It might be beneficial while not being optimal on its own.

The obvious example is if it has different behaviour around local minima, it could be an altenate pathway out.

I have often wondered if doing training with radically different aproaches for the first few iterarions would avoid any method specific artifacts before the weights had time to denoise.

bz_bz_bzβ€’about 2 hours ago
Their image classification benchmarks include both: https://pub.sakana.ai/pc-alm/assets/figures/benchmark_accura...
cs702β€’19 minutes ago
~74% on CIFAR-10. Still a far cry from backprop.

I didn't see ImageNet. TinyImageNet is something else.

guldβ€’about 6 hours ago
New paper by Sakana.ai [1]

[1]: https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.31022