On Wed 8 May at ICLR2024, we will be presenting the recent work of Neural Fourier Transform, a general approach of equivariance/symmetry learning that naturally extends the classic Fourier transform. Please drop by to check it out! https://t.co/u2x9ZZTuQC
Modeling the world for action by generating pixel is as wasteful and doomed to failure as the largely-abandoned idea of "analysis by synthesis".
Decades ago, there was a big debate in ML about the relative advantages of generative methods vs discriminative methods for classification.
Learning theorists, such as Vapnik, argued against generative methods, pointing out that training a generative modeling was a way more difficult than classification (from the sample complexity standpoint).
Regardless, a whole community in computer vision was arguing that recognition should work by generating pixels from explanatory latent variables. At inference time, one would infer the configuration of latent variables that generated the observed pixels.
The inference method would use optimization: e.g. use a 3D model of an object and try to find the pose parameters that reproduce the image.
This never quite worked, and it was very slow.
Later, some people converted to the Bayesian religion and tried to use Bayesian inference for the latent (e.g. using variational approximations and/or sampling).
At some point, when Non-Parametric Bayes and Latent Dirichlet Allocation became the rage in text modeling, some folks heroically attempted to apply that to object recognition from images.
>>> THIS WAS A COMPLETE AND UTTER FAILURE <<<
If your goal is to train a world model for recognition or planning, using pixel-level prediction is a terrible idea.
Generation happens to work for text because text is discrete with a finite number of symbols. Dealing with uncertainty in the prediction is easy in such settings. Dealing with prediction uncertainty in high-dimension continuous sensory inputs is simply intractable.
That's why generative models for sensory inputs are doomed to failure.
Ever got frustrated by the fact that most application/theory of Symmetry in ML are built on "linear action" on data?
We just recently released a new preprint to rethink the equivariance learning by establishing the "Neural" extension of Fourier Transform. https://t.co/u2x9ZZSX14
By extending our scopes from "action on a single data instance" to "action on a function on the entire data space", we can extend the theory of FT and equivariance learning to the cases involving nonlinear actions, such as nonlinearly deformed shift or Object rendering, etc
Ever got frustrated by the fact that most application/theory of Symmetry in ML are built on "linear action" on data?
We just recently released a new preprint to rethink the equivariance learning by establishing the "Neural" extension of Fourier Transform. https://t.co/u2x9ZZSX14
Neural Fourier Transform: A General Approach to Equivariant Representation Learning. (arXiv:2305.18484v1 [https://t.co/zjV5HgYw5a]) https://t.co/AbQ1FlgHsR
For some reason my wife, not being so familiar with English names, thought that the person I strive to be is Mike "Ty"son. Not that it makes so much difference to me in terms of sheer Badassness, but I wonder how "Orri"son became "Ty"son in her mind LOL