Homepage
Close
Menu

Site Navigation

  • Home
  • Archive(TODO)
    • By Day
    • By Month
  • About(TODO)
  • Stats
Close
by fchollet on 2018-10-26 (UTC).

Many people in engineering believe that to understand something, it is necessary and sufficient to have a low-level mathematical description of that thing. That you need to "know the math behind it". In nearly all cases, it is neither sufficient nor at all necessary - far from it

— François Chollet (@fchollet) October 26, 2018
thought
by fchollet on 2018-10-26 (UTC).

The same is true of backprop in deep learning -- knowing how to code up backprop by hand gives you no useful knowledge wrt deep learning, and inversely, developing powerful mental models for deep learning does not in any way require knowing the algorithmic details of backprop

— François Chollet (@fchollet) October 26, 2018
thought
by fchollet on 2018-10-26 (UTC).

Similar to how, say, you can always reinvent the Pythagorean theorem on the fly if you think about geometry through the lens of vector products, or how you don't need to memorize the quadratic formula if you understand what an equation is and the general process for solving them

— François Chollet (@fchollet) October 26, 2018
thought

Tags

learning tutorial misc nlp rstats gan ethics research dataviz survey python tool security kaggle video thought bayesian humour tensorflow w_code bias dataset pytorch cv tip application javascript forecast swift golang rl jax julia gnn causal surey diffusion
© Copyright Philosophy 2018 Site Template by Colorlib