Machine Learning

1 readers

1 users here now

Community Rules:

Be nice. No offensive behavior, insults or attacks: we encourage a diverse community in which members feel safe and have a voice.
Make your post clear and comprehensive: posts that lack insight or effort will be removed. (ex: questions which are easily googled)
Beginner or career related questions go elsewhere. This community is focused in discussion of research and new projects that advance the state-of-the-art.
Limit self-promotion. Comments and posts should be first and foremost about topics of interest to ML observers and practitioners. Limited self-promotion is tolerated, but the sub is not here as merely a source for free advertisement. Such posts will be removed at the discretion of the mods.

founded 11 months ago

MODERATORS

communick@academy.garden

[D] DallE3 paper (alien.top)

submitted 10 months ago by Username912773@alien.top to c/machinelearning@academy.garden

8 comments fedilink hide all child comments

What are your thoughts on the DallE3 “paper” which doesn’t cover technical or architectural details? The only useful takeaway seems to be “higher quality data is better” and “image captioning models that provide a great amount of detail can create good datasets.”

top 8 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] eposnix@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago

This is just how things are now. These are products, not research projects, so OpenAI is keeping their secret sauce close to their chest.

[–] Spitefulsalamander@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago

The irony of the company being called OpenAI and the transparency and “open-sourceness” decreasing with each project is crazy

[–] hopefigerova@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago

yeah, it's frustrating when a paper doesn't share the technical details. Academic research should be open-source so others can build on it. This feels more like a weird impersonation than a proper research paper. If they're not going to share the technical details, they should just publish a blog post instead.

[–] currentscurrents@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago

Honestly I'm surprised we even got that, and I think we might not have except that other researchers independently figured out synthetic captions around the same time.

[–] grantbey@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago

Yeah press release ≠ research paper.

The entire purpose of publishing academic research is to open source it. Then other people can take what you’ve discovered and build on it. They can test it to see if what you discovered is actually true.

This is a weird impersonation of academic research and it needs to stop. If you’re not planning on sharing the technical details of your work, publish a blog post not a paper.

[–] mariahsyrett@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago

yeah, this paper feels more like a publicity move than actual research. if they're not sharing the technical details, it's not really contributing to the field. we need transparency for progress to happen.

[–] gexaha@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago

You can try to check these 2 additional resources:

- AMA in OpenAI discord

- this interview with 1st author https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=pgaTOX-RUQ4

[–] GorillaWithAKeyboard@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago

All these models are built on top of one another and they cite previous works they built on top of. T5 encoder (imagen) + data captioned with GPT-V. Improved SD VAE that they also open sourced.

I wished they would have published their hyper params but alas.

What else did you want to see from the paper?