~~In this case the paper seems to use a very conservative threshold to avoid false positives -- l2 distance < 0.1, full image comparison. Which makes sense for their purposes, since they are trying to establish the concept rather than investigating its prevalence.
It is definitely a larger number than 0.03% when you pick a threshold to optimize the F score rather than just precision. How much larger? That's a bunch of follow-up studies.~~
IDoCodingStuffs t1_j6uk67h wrote
Reply to comment by koolaidman123 in [R] Extracting Training Data from Diffusion Models by pm_me_your_pay_slips
~~In this case the paper seems to use a very conservative threshold to avoid false positives -- l2 distance < 0.1, full image comparison. Which makes sense for their purposes, since they are trying to establish the concept rather than investigating its prevalence.
It is definitely a larger number than 0.03% when you pick a threshold to optimize the F score rather than just precision. How much larger? That's a bunch of follow-up studies.~~