Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Red-Portal t1_jc4u84k wrote

what do you mean by generalizing here? Reconstruction of OOD data? Ironically, VAEs are pissing everybody because they reconstruct OOD data too well. In fact, one of the things people are dying to get to work is anomaly detection or OOD detection, but VAEs suck at it despite all attempts. Like your dog who cannot guard your house because he really likes strangers, VAEs suck at OOD detection because they reconstruct OOD too well.

5

Noddybear t1_jc509fa wrote

I spent a year with a team of engineers trying to get VAEs to work for textual anomaly detection. It didn't work that well.

3

currentscurrents t1_jc5fxq3 wrote

Wouldn't that make them great for the task they're actually learning to do: compression? You want to be able to compress and reconstruct any input data, even if less efficient for OOD data.

I do wonder why we don't use autoencoders for data compression. But this may simply be because neural networks require 1000x more compute power than traditional compressors.

1

Red-Portal t1_jc5g7ap wrote

Oh they have been used for compression. I also remember a paper on quantization, which made a buzz at the time.

1

currentscurrents t1_jc5ghbv wrote

Would love to read some research papers if you have a link!

But I mean that we do not use them for compression in practice. We use hand-crafted algorithms, mostly DEFLATE for lossless + a handful of lossy DCT-based algorithms for audio/video/images.

1

FrogBearSalamander t1_jc5vvrb wrote

> Would love to read some research papers if you have a link!

2