Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

[deleted] t1_ircdv0t wrote

So, another paper, and no code. As usual.

3

TFenrir t1_ircxo8d wrote

I think if you expect every paper that is shared here to result in a model that's accessible or an app, you are going to be perpetually disappointed. That's... Just not how it works

3

[deleted] t1_ircybd9 wrote

If science is about reproducibility, then providing verifiable results and a simple method of attaining such should be a requirement for any such scientific finding.

One would think.

3

TFenrir t1_ird090m wrote

The nature of these research papers are

  1. That they often come out of private companies research. So much of the data used to train or the models that come out of the research are, understandably, not just available for anyone to use.

  2. The research papers often are reproducible - the mechanisms and the architecture from them directly contribute to open source efforts. Take a look at the stable diffusion subreddit, a research paper came out a few weeks ago, from Google, and now the techniques from that are being applied. I just saw another research paper that came out less than a week ago from Google being applied to create 3d models.

5

[deleted] t1_ird11zt wrote

Sure, I agree 100%. And perhaps it's just me harping on the OpenAI thing. A company promises open everything, gets a billion dollars in funding, then releases a GPT-3 API instead of source code release.

And the SD point is well taken, something to be said for a group that can take any of these research papers and then release an open source model as a result. I think they are now raising $100m with a $1b valuation, good for them.

2