Topic
Test set
About: Test set is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 8398 publications have been published within this topic receiving 236931 citations.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
Posted Content•
TL;DR: This paper proposed two novel model architectures for computing continuous vector representations of words from very large data sets, and the quality of these representations is measured in a word similarity task and the results are compared to the previously best performing techniques based on different types of neural networks.
Abstract: We propose two novel model architectures for computing continuous vector representations of words from very large data sets. The quality of these representations is measured in a word similarity task, and the results are compared to the previously best performing techniques based on different types of neural networks. We observe large improvements in accuracy at much lower computational cost, i.e. it takes less than a day to learn high quality word vectors from a 1.6 billion words data set. Furthermore, we show that these vectors provide state-of-the-art performance on our test set for measuring syntactic and semantic word similarities.
20,077 citations
27 Jun 2016
TL;DR: In this article, the authors explore ways to scale up networks in ways that aim at utilizing the added computation as efficiently as possible by suitably factorized convolutions and aggressive regularization.
Abstract: Convolutional networks are at the core of most state of-the-art computer vision solutions for a wide variety of tasks. Since 2014 very deep convolutional networks started to become mainstream, yielding substantial gains in various benchmarks. Although increased model size and computational cost tend to translate to immediate quality gains for most tasks (as long as enough labeled data is provided for training), computational efficiency and low parameter count are still enabling factors for various use cases such as mobile vision and big-data scenarios. Here we are exploring ways to scale up networks in ways that aim at utilizing the added computation as efficiently as possible by suitably factorized convolutions and aggressive regularization. We benchmark our methods on the ILSVRC 2012 classification challenge validation set demonstrate substantial gains over the state of the art: 21:2% top-1 and 5:6% top-5 error for single frame evaluation using a network with a computational cost of 5 billion multiply-adds per inference and with using less than 25 million parameters. With an ensemble of 4 models and multi-crop evaluation, we report 3:5% top-5 error and 17:3% top-1 error on the validation set and 3:6% top-5 error on the official test set.
16,962 citations
Posted Content•
TL;DR: This work is exploring ways to scale up networks in ways that aim at utilizing the added computation as efficiently as possible by suitably factorized convolutions and aggressive regularization.
Abstract: Convolutional networks are at the core of most state-of-the-art computer vision solutions for a wide variety of tasks. Since 2014 very deep convolutional networks started to become mainstream, yielding substantial gains in various benchmarks. Although increased model size and computational cost tend to translate to immediate quality gains for most tasks (as long as enough labeled data is provided for training), computational efficiency and low parameter count are still enabling factors for various use cases such as mobile vision and big-data scenarios. Here we explore ways to scale up networks in ways that aim at utilizing the added computation as efficiently as possible by suitably factorized convolutions and aggressive regularization. We benchmark our methods on the ILSVRC 2012 classification challenge validation set demonstrate substantial gains over the state of the art: 21.2% top-1 and 5.6% top-5 error for single frame evaluation using a network with a computational cost of 5 billion multiply-adds per inference and with using less than 25 million parameters. With an ensemble of 4 models and multi-crop evaluation, we report 3.5% top-5 error on the validation set (3.6% error on the test set) and 17.3% top-1 error on the validation set.
15,519 citations
Proceedings Article•
16 Jan 2013TL;DR: Two novel model architectures for computing continuous vector representations of words from very large data sets are proposed and it is shown that these vectors provide state-of-the-art performance on the authors' test set for measuring syntactic and semantic word similarities.
Abstract: We propose two novel model architectures for computing continuous vector
representations of words from very large data sets. The quality of these
representations is measured in a word similarity task, and the results are
compared to the previously best performing techniques based on different types
of neural networks. We observe large improvements in accuracy at much lower
computational cost, i.e. it takes less than a day to learn high quality word
vectors from a 1.6 billion words data set. Furthermore, we show that these
vectors provide state-of-the-art performance on our test set for measuring
syntactic and semantic word similarities.
9,270 citations
Proceedings Article•
20 Mar 2015TL;DR: It is argued that the primary cause of neural networks' vulnerability to adversarial perturbation is their linear nature, supported by new quantitative results while giving the first explanation of the most intriguing fact about them: their generalization across architectures and training sets.
Abstract: Several machine learning models, including neural networks, consistently misclassify adversarial examples---inputs formed by applying small but intentionally worst-case perturbations to examples from the dataset, such that the perturbed input results in the model outputting an incorrect answer with high confidence. Early attempts at explaining this phenomenon focused on nonlinearity and overfitting. We argue instead that the primary cause of neural networks' vulnerability to adversarial perturbation is their linear nature. This explanation is supported by new quantitative results while giving the first explanation of the most intriguing fact about them: their generalization across architectures and training sets. Moreover, this view yields a simple and fast method of generating adversarial examples. Using this approach to provide examples for adversarial training, we reduce the test set error of a maxout network on the MNIST dataset.
7,994 citations