Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Most multi-view reconstruction models need full supervision. We show they can self-improve without any ground truth labels. Introducing SelfEvo: Self-Improving 4D Perception via Self-Distillation. Up to +36.5% in video depth, +20.1% in camera estimation, zero annotation.

25,611 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

New short course: Attention in Transformers: Concepts and Code in PyTorch. Last week we released a course on how LLM transformers work. This week, go deeper and learn about the technical ideas behind the attention mechanism, and see how to code it in PyTorch. This course is built with Joshua Starmer, Founder and CEO of StatQuest. The attention mechanism was a breakthrough that led to transformers, the architecture powering large language models like ChatGPT. Transformers, introduced in the 2017 paper: "Attention is All You Need" by Viswani and others, took off because of its highly scalable design. In this course, you’ll learn how the attention mechanism, a key element of transformer-based LLMs, works and implement it in PyTorch. You'll develop deep intuition about building reliable, functional, and scalable AI applications. What you will do: - Understand the evolution of the attention mechanism, a key breakthrough that led to transformers. - Learn the relationships between word embeddings, positional embeddings, and attention. - Learn about the Query, Key, and Value matrices, and how to produce and use them in attention. - Walk through the math required to calculate self-attention and masked self-attention to learn why and how they work. - Understand the difference between self-attention and masked self-attention and how one is used in the encoder to build context-aware embeddings and the other is used in the decoder for generative outputs. - Learn the details of the encoder-decoder architecture, cross-attention, and multi-head attention and how they are all incorporated into a transformer. - Use PyTorch to code a class that implements self-attention, masked self-attention, and multi-head attention. There're lots of exciting technical details in this course. Please sign up here:

Andrew Ng

132,357 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

New Paper! Darwin Godel Machine: Open-Ended Evolution of Self-Improving Agents A longstanding goal of AI research has been the creation of AI that can learn indefinitely. One path toward that goal is an AI that improves itself by rewriting its own code, including any code responsible for learning. That idea, known as a Gödel Machine, proposed by Jürgen Schmidhuber over two decades ago, is a hypothetical self-improving AI. It optimally solves problems by recursively rewriting its own code when it can mathematically prove a better strategy, making it a key concept in meta-learning or “learning to learn.” While the theoretical Gödel Machine promised provably beneficial self-modifications, its realization relied on an impractical assumption: that the AI could mathematically prove that a proposed change in its own code would yield a net improvement before adopting it. Sakana AI, in collaboration with Jeff Clune’s lab at UBC, proposes something more feasible: a system that harnesses the principles of open-ended algorithms like Darwinian evolution to search for improvements that empirically improve performance. We call the result the Darwin Gödel Machine. DGMs leverage foundation models to propose code improvements, and use recent innovations in open-ended algorithms to search for a growing library of diverse, high-quality AI agents. Applied to practical tasks, we implemented Darwin Gödel Machine as a self-improving coding agent that rewrites its own code to improve performance on programming tasks. It creates various self-improvements, such as a patch validation step, better file viewing, enhanced editing tools, generating and ranking multiple solutions to choose the best one, and adding a history of what has been tried before (and why it failed) when making new changes (see the attached video). We believe that Darwin Gödel Machines represent a concrete step towards AI systems that can autonomously gather their own stepping stones to learn and innovate forever!

hardmaru

104,854 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

QUOTE 1: Conscience is an indispensable companion of both moral life and holistic self-realization. It recognizes our errors and weaknesses, giving an early signal for correction. Yet conscience itself must grow — and its development is supported by reason and constructive feelings. : The author presents conscience as an indispensable companion to both moral life and holistic self-realization. It serves as an inner guardian, sensitively detecting our errors and weaknesses and providing an early warning that allows for timely correction. However, conscience is not static or infallible. It must itself grow and mature. This development is nourished by two essential forces: reason, which brings clarity, consistency, and depth of understanding, and constructive feelings, which provide warmth, empathy, and moral sensitivity. When reason and feeling work in harmony, conscience becomes sharper, wiser, and more reliable. Without this ongoing cultivation, conscience can remain narrow, inconsistent, or overly rigid. With it, conscience evolves into a powerful guide that supports not only ethical conduct but the continuous unfolding of our full human potential. QUOTE 2: The choice of the modern individual is the duty of full self-realization and the readiness to face the judgment of conscience in moments of weakness. : The author states that the fundamental choice facing the modern individual is the conscious acceptance of a duty: the commitment to full self-realization. This is not optional self-improvement but a moral obligation to develop one’s intellect, character, creativity, and potential to the highest possible degree. Equally important is the readiness to face the judgment of one’s own conscience during moments of weakness. True self-realization demands honesty with oneself. When we falter, conscience must be allowed to speak clearly and without evasion. This inner accountability prevents self-deception and ensures that personal growth remains genuine rather than superficial. In this view, modern freedom is inseparable from responsibility. The privilege of shaping one’s life comes with the duty to shape it meaningfully and the courage to confront one’s shortcomings. Self-realization and moral self-honesty together form the core ethical demand of our time.

Zafar Mirzo | Quotes

3,506,414 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Was especially curious to ask Andrej Karpathy why self-driving cars took a decade+ from stellar demo rides to even somewhat deployed. Andrej led AI at Tesla for 5 years. I really wanted to know whether these frictions should lengthen our AGI timelines, or whether they were idiosyncratic to self driving. Driving has a really high cost of failure. Humans are surprisingly reliable drivers - we have a serious accident every 400,000 miles/7 years. And self-driving cars need to match or beat this safety profile before they can be deployed. But are most domains like this? Before the interview, it seemed to me that almost every domain we would want to plug AGI into has a much lower cost of failure. If fully autonomous software engineers weren’t allowed to make a mistake for 7 years, deployment would indeed be super slow. Andrej made an interesting point that I hadn’t heard before: compared to self driving, software engineering has a higher (and potentially unbounded) cost of failure: > If you’re writing actual production-grade code, any kind of mistake could lead to a security vulnerability. Hundreds of millions of people’s personal Social Security numbers could get leaked. > In self-driving, if things go wrong, you might get injured. There are worse outcomes. But in software, it’s almost unbounded how terrible something could be. > In some ways, software engineering is a much harder problem [than self driving]. Self-driving is just one of thousands of things that people do. It’s almost like a single vertical. Whereas when we’re talking about general software engineering, there’s more surface area. There’s potentially another reason why the LLM -> widely deployed AGI transition might happen much faster: LLMs give us perception, representations, and common sense (to deal with out of distribution examples) for free, whereas these had to be molded from scratch for self-driving cars. I asked Andrej about this: > I don’t know how much we’re getting for free. LLMs are still pretty fallible and they have a lot of gaps that still need to be filled in. I don’t think that we’re getting magical generalization completely out of the box. > The other aspect that I wanted to return to is that self-driving cars are nowhere near done still. The deployments are pretty minimal. Even Waymo has very few cars. They’ve built something that lives in the future. They’ve had to pull back the future, but they had to make it uneconomical. > Also, when you look at these cars and there’s no one driving, there’s more human-in-the-loop than you might expect. In some sense, we haven’t actually removed the person, we’ve moved them to somewhere where you can’t see them.

Dwarkesh Patel

135,020 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten