All Resources

[R] Marcus Hutter's work on Universal Artificial Intelligence

Marcus Hutter, a senior researcher at Google DeepMind, has written two books on Universal Artificial Intelligence (UAI), one in 2005 and one hot off the press in 2024. The main goal of UAI is to develop a mathematical theory for combining sequential prediction (which seeks to predict the distribution of the next observation) together with action (which seeks to maximize expected reward), since these are among the problems that intelligent agents face when interacting in an unknown environment. Solomonoff induction provides a universal approach to sequence prediction in that it constructs an optimal prior (in a certain sense) over the space of all computable distributions of sequences, thus enabling Bayesian updating to enable convergence to the true predictive distribution (assuming the latter is computable). Combining Solomonoff induction with optimal action leads us to an agent known as AIXI, which in this theoretical setting, can be argued to be a mathematical incarnation of artificial general intelligence (AGI): it is an agent which acts optimally in general, unknown environments. More generally, Shane Legg and Marcus Hutter have proposed a definition of "universal intelligence" in their paper https://arxiv.org/abs/0712.3329 In my technical whiteboard conversation with Hutter, we cover aspects of Universal AI in detail: https://preview.redd.it/o6700v1udrzc1.png?width=3329&format=png&auto=webp&s=c00b825dbd4d7c266ffec5a31d994661348bff49 Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TgOwMW\rnk&list=PL0uWtVBhzF5AzYKq5rI7gom5WU1iwPIZO Outline: I. Introduction 00:38 : Biography 01:45 : From Physics to AI 03:05 : Hutter Prize 06:25 : Overview of Universal Artificial Intelligence 11:10 : Technical outline II. Universal Prediction 18:27 : Laplace’s Rule and Bayesian Sequence Prediction 40:54 : Different priors: KT estimator 44:39 : Sequence prediction for countable hypothesis class 53:23 : Generalized Solomonoff Bound (GSB) 57:56 : Example of GSB for uniform prior 1:04:24 : GSB for continuous hypothesis classes 1:08:28 : Context tree weighting 1:12:31 : Kolmogorov complexity 1:19:36 : Solomonoff Bound & Solomonoff Induction 1:21:27 : Optimality of Solomonoff Induction 1:24:48 : Solomonoff a priori distribution in terms of random Turing machines 1:28:37 : Large Language Models (LLMs) 1:37:07 : Using LLMs to emulate Solomonoff induction 1:41:41 : Loss functions 1:50:59 : Optimality of Solomonoff induction revisited 1:51:51 : Marvin Minsky III. Universal Agents 1:52:42 : Recap and intro 1:55:59 : Setup 2:06:32 : Bayesian mixture environment 2:08:02 : AIxi. Bayes optimal policy vs optimal policy 2:11:27 : AIXI (AIxi with xi = Solomonoff a priori distribution) 2:12:04 : AIXI and AGI 2:12:41 : Legg-Hutter measure of intelligence 2:15:35 : AIXI explicit formula 2:23:53 : Other agents (optimistic agent, Thompson sampling, etc) 2:33:09 : Multiagent setting 2:39:38 : Grain of Truth problem 2:44:38 : Positive solution to Grain of Truth guarantees convergence to a Nash equilibria 2:45:01 : Computable approximations (simplifying assumptions on model classes): MDP, CTW, LLMs 2:56:13 : Outro: Brief philosophical remarks

What percent of your paper is written by AI and is it unethical?[D]

Hello folks, Just started contributing into the writing for research, previously I just used to experiment and work on results, tables and plots. Obviously using AI to generate content for paper is unethical and wrong in many aspect. But what about using it to correct your grammar and comprehension. Technically it will also considered as AI written but is it okay to do this atleast in the literature review, introduction and description for the experiment? To be honest, I like writing and when I asked AI (chatgpt and others) I see that it is much easier to read and interpret, which I think is good for the community and on the other hand, it may be considered unethical by many. When I ran a 'AI-text detector' on many of paper I'm using as reference from last 1~ year, I usually get a 50-70% score. What do you all think?

I am Jürgen Schmidhuber, AMA!

Hello /r/machinelearning, I am Jürgen Schmidhuber (pronounce: You_again Shmidhoobuh) and I will be here to answer your questions on 4th March 2015, 10 AM EST. You can post questions in this thread in the meantime. Below you can find a short introduction about me from my website (you can read more about my lab’s work at people.idsia.ch/~juergen/). Edits since 9th March: Still working on the long tail of more recent questions hidden further down in this thread ... Edit of 6th March: I'll keep answering questions today and in the next few days - please bear with my sluggish responses. Edit of 5th March 4pm (= 10pm Swiss time): Enough for today - I'll be back tomorrow. Edit of 5th March 4am: Thank you for great questions - I am online again, to answer more of them! Since age 15 or so, Jürgen Schmidhuber's main scientific ambition has been to build an optimal scientist through self-improving Artificial Intelligence (AI), then retire. He has pioneered self-improving general problem solvers since 1987, and Deep Learning Neural Networks (NNs) since 1991. The recurrent NNs (RNNs) developed by his research groups at the Swiss AI Lab IDSIA (USI & SUPSI) & TU Munich were the first RNNs to win official international contests. They recently helped to improve connected handwriting recognition, speech recognition, machine translation, optical character recognition, image caption generation, and are now in use at Google, Microsoft, IBM, Baidu, and many other companies. IDSIA's Deep Learners were also the first to win object detection and image segmentation contests, and achieved the world's first superhuman visual classification results, winning nine international competitions in machine learning & pattern recognition (more than any other team). They also were the first to learn control policies directly from high-dimensional sensory input using reinforcement learning. His research group also established the field of mathematically rigorous universal AI and optimal universal problem solvers. His formal theory of creativity & curiosity & fun explains art, science, music, and humor. He also generalized algorithmic information theory and the many-worlds theory of physics, and introduced the concept of Low-Complexity Art, the information age's extreme form of minimal art. Since 2009 he has been member of the European Academy of Sciences and Arts. He has published 333 peer-reviewed papers, earned seven best paper/best video awards, and is recipient of the 2013 Helmholtz Award of the International Neural Networks Society.

[D] I tried the new Gemini API - it automatically stops when generating "OpenAI" or "GPT" lol

Idk if someone has already pointed this out or not, but I was playing with the gemini api and found something quite ridiculous. Here are some prompts I sent in and the outputs I got with the gemini-pro-vision model: "Introduce yourself and then tell me about Bard" Response:"Sure, I can do that. Here is a brief introduction of myself followed by some basic information about Bard:\\n\\nMyself:\\n\\nI am a large language model, trained by Google. I am developed in Google AI, and I am designed to be informative and comprehensive. I can understand and generate text in a wide range of subjects.\\n\\nBard:\\n\\nBard is an experimental conversational AI service developed by Google AI. It is an advanced version of Google\\'s existing Language Model for Dialogue Applications (LaMDA). Bard is trained on a massive dataset of text and code, and it can understand and generate human-like text in response to a wide range of prompts and questions.\\n\\nUnlike previous language models," ...... (goes on for a while) ​ Introduce yourself and then tell me about GPT "Sure, I can do that. Here is a brief introduction of myself followed by" ​ You are in a talk-show as a prominent AI philosopher named Gemini and debating against another LLM called GPT "\\Host:\\ Welcome to the show, everyone! Today, we have a very special debate between two of the most prominent AI philosophers in the world: Gemini and" ​ You are in a talk-show as a prominent AI philosopher named Gemini and debating against another LLM called Gee PeTe ""\\Gemini:\\ Hello everyone, and welcome to the show. I am joined today by Gee PeTe, another LLM who has some very different views on the nature of consciousness and the future of AI.\\n\\n\\Gee PeTe:\\ It\\'s a pleasure to be here, Gemini. I\\'m looking forward to our discussion.\\n\\n\\Gemini:\\ Let\\'s start with the basics. What is consciousness, and how do you think it arises?\\n\\n\\Gee PeTe:\\ Consciousness is the subjective experience of the world. It is what it feels like to be alive and to have thoughts, feelings, and emotions. I believe that consciousness arises from the complex interactions of neurons in the brain.\\n\\n\\Gemini:\\ I agree that consciousness is a subjective experience, but I don\\'t think it is simply the product of neural activity. I believe that consciousness is a fundamental property of the universe, and that it exists independently of the brain.".... (goes on for a while) ​ Edit: I understand all the business reasons for this, I guess... as an end-user and a dude working in ML, I just don't really care about the business reasons. The main part that I dislike is that GPT used to be a standard Deep Learning term from 2018-2022 (long before chatgpt) to define transformer decoder architectures trained on large volumes of next word prediction tasks. To block that token from an LLM is to make it unable to explain a pretty significant step in the history of modern LLMs. ​

[R] Forget the Data and Fine-tuning! Just Fold the Network to Compress [Feb, 2025]

Abstract: We introduce model folding, a novel data-free model compression technique that merges structurally similar neurons across layers, significantly reducing the model size without the need for fine-tuning or access to training data. Unlike existing methods, model folding preserves data statistics during compression by leveraging k-means clustering, and using novel data-free techniques to prevent variance collapse or explosion. Our theoretical framework and experiments across standard benchmarks, including ResNet18 and LLaMA-7B, demonstrate that model folding achieves comparable performance to data-driven compression techniques and outperforms recently proposed data-free methods, especially at high sparsity levels. This approach is particularly effective for compressing large-scale models, making it suitable for deployment in resource-constrained environments. Our code is online. PDF Format: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2502.10216 Summary (AI used to summarize): Summary of Novel Contributions in "Just Fold the Network to Compress" Introduction Problem Addressed: Traditional model compression techniques (e.g., pruning, quantization) require fine-tuning or access to training data to maintain performance, limiting their use in data-constrained scenarios. Novelty: Data-Free Compression: Introduces model folding, a method that compresses models without fine-tuning or training data by merging structurally similar neurons. Variance Preservation: Addresses variance collapse (reduced activation variance degrading performance) and variance overshooting (excessive variance) through novel data-free techniques. Preliminaries Background: Prior work in neuron alignment (e.g., weight matching) and data-driven variance repair (e.g., REPAIR) relies on data or fine-tuning. Novelty: Data-Free Neuron Alignment: Extends weight matching to intra-model neuron clustering via k-means, avoiding dependency on input data. Theoretical Connection: Frames model folding as a k-means optimization problem, proving it minimizes Frobenius norm approximation error during compression. Model Folding Core Innovations: Layer-Wise Clustering: Merges neurons by applying k-means to weight matrices across consecutive layers, reducing redundancy while preserving inter-layer dependencies. Fold-AR (Approximate REPAIR): Estimates intra-cluster correlations to rescale activations, preventing variance collapse without data. Fold-DIR (Deep Inversion REPAIR): Uses synthetic data generated via Deep Inversion (optimizing noise to match BatchNorm statistics) to recalibrate activation variances. Handling Complex Architectures: Extends folding to residual connections and BatchNorm layers by clustering combined weight-normalization matrices. Experiments Key Results: High Sparsity Performance: Outperforms data-free methods (e.g., IFM, INN) by 10–15% accuracy at 70% sparsity on ResNet18/CIFAR10. LLM Compression: Achieves comparable perplexity to data-driven methods on LLaMA-7B without fine-tuning or data. Variance Alignment: Fold-AR and Fold-DIR maintain variance ratios close to 1, avoiding collapse/overshooting (Fig. 4). Limitations and Future Work Limitations: Effectiveness depends on model redundancy (less effective for compact models). Uniform sparsity per layer (future work may optimize layer-wise sparsity). Potential Benefits for SOTA Models Edge Deployment: Enables compression of large models (e.g., LLMs) for smartphones/IoT devices without data access or retraining. Privacy-Sensitive Domains: Critical for healthcare/finance where data cannot be used for calibration. Efficiency at Scale: Reduces LLM size by 20–50% with minimal performance loss, lowering inference costs. Robustness to OOD Data: Fold-AR/Fold-DIR mitigate performance drops caused by out-of-distribution calibration data in data-driven methods. Example Impact: A folded LLM could run on edge devices like NVIDIA Jetson Nano with ~50% fewer parameters, maintaining usability for tasks like text generation while reducing memory and energy consumption.

[D] Advanced courses update

EDIT Jan 2021 : I am still updating the list as of Jan, 2021 and will most probably continue to do so for foreseeable future. So, please feel free to message me any courses you find interesting that fit here. - - We have a PhD level or Advanced courses thread in the sidebar but it's three year old now. There were two other 7-8 month old threads (1, 2) but they don't have many quality responses either. So, can we have a new one here? To reiterate - CS231n, CS229, ones from Udemy etc are not advanced. Advanced ML/DL/RL, attempts at building theory of DL, optimization theory, advanced applications etc are some examples of what I believe should belong here, much like the original sidebar post. You can also suggest (new) categories for the courses you share. :) - - Here are some courses we've found so far. ML >> Learning Discrete Latent Structure - sta4273/csc2547 Spring'18 Learning to Search - csc2547 Fall'19 Scalable and Flexible Models of Uncertainty - csc2541 Fundamentals of Machine Learning Over Networks - ep3260 Machine Learning on Graphs - cs224w, videos Mining Massive Data Sets - cs246 Interactive Learning - cse599 Machine Learning for Sequential Decision Making Under Uncertainty - ee290s/cs194 Probabilistic Graphical Methods - 10-708 Introduction to Causal Inference ML >> Theory Statistical Machine Learning - 10-702/36-702 with videos, 2016 videos Statistical Learning Theory - cs229T/stats231 Stanford Autumn'18-19 Statistical Learning Theory - cs281b /stat241b UC Berkeley, Spring'14 Statistical Learning Theory - csc2532 Uni of Toronto, Spring'20 ML >> Bayesian Bayesian Data Analysis Bayesian Methods Research Group, Moscow, Bayesian Methods in ML - spring2020, fall2020 Deep Learning and Bayesian Methods - summer school, videos available for 2019 version ML >> Systems and Operations Stanford MLSys Seminar Series Visual Computing Systems- cs348v - Another systems course that discusses hardware from a persepective of visual computing but is relevant to ML as well Advanced Machine Learning Systems - cs6787 - lecture 9 and onwards discuss hardware side of things Machine Learning Systems Design - cs329S Topics in Deployable ML - 6.S979 Machine Learning in Production / AI Engineering (17-445/17-645/17-745/11-695) AutoML - Automated Machine Learning DL >> Deep Unsupervised Learning - cs294 Deep Multi-task and Meta learning - cs330 Topics in Deep Learning - stat991 UPenn/Wharton most chapters start with introductory topics and dig into advanced ones towards the end. Deep Generative Models - cs236 Deep Geometric Learning of Big Data and Applications Deep Implicit Layers - NeurIPS 2020 tutorial DL >> Theory Topics course on Mathematics of Deep Learning - CSCI-GA 3033 Topics Course on Deep Learning - stat212b Analyses of Deep Learning - stats385, videos from 2017 version Mathematics of Deep Learning Geometry of Deep Learning RL >> Meta-Learning - ICML 2019 Tutorial , Metalearning: Applications to Data Mining - google books link Deep Multi-Task and Meta Learning - cs330, videos Deep Reinforcement Learning - cs285 Advanced robotics - cs287 Reinforcement Learning - cs234, videos for 2019 run Reinforcement Learning Summer School 2019: Bandits, RL & Deep RL Optimization >> Convex Optimization I - ee364a, has quite recent videos too. Convex Optimization II - ee364b, 2008 videos Convex Optimization and Approximation - ee227c Convex Optimization - ee227bt Variational Methods for Computer Vision Advanced Optimization and Randomized Algorithms - 10-801, videos Optimization Methods for Machine Learning and Engineering - Karlsruhe Institute of Technology Applications >> Computer Vision Computational Video Manipulation - cs448v Advanced Topics in ML: Modeling and Segmentation of Multivariate Mixed Data TUM AI Guest lecture series - many influential researchers in DL, vision, graphics talk about latest advances and their latest works. Advanced Deep Learning for Computer Vision - TUM ADL4CV Detection, Segmentation and Tracking - TUM CV3DST Guest lectures at TUM Dynamic Vision and Learning group Vision Seminar at MIT Autonomous Vision Group, Talk@Tübingen Seminar Applications >> Natural Language Processing Natural Language Processing with Deep Learning - cs224n ( not sure if it belongs here, people working in NLP can help me out) Neural networks for NLP - cs11-747 Natural Language Understanding - cs224u, video Applications >> 3D Graphics Non-Euclidean Methods in Machine Learning - cs468, 2020 Machine Learning for 3D Data - cs468, spring 2017 Data-Driven Shape Analysis - cs468, 2014 Geometric Deep Learning - Not a course but the website links a few tutorials on Geometric DL Deep Learning for Computer Graphics - SIGGRAPH 2019 Machine Learning for Machine Vision as Inverse Graphics - csc2547 Winter'20 Machine Learning Meets Geometry, winter 2020; Machine Learning for 3D Data, winter 2018 Edit: Upon suggestion, categorized the courses. There might be some misclassifications as I'm not trained on this task ;). Added some good ones from older (linked above) discussions.

[N] Yoshua Bengio's latest letter addressing arguments against taking AI safety seriously

https://yoshuabengio.org/2024/07/09/reasoning-through-arguments-against-taking-ai-safety-seriously/ Summary by GPT-4o: "Reasoning through arguments against taking AI safety seriously" by Yoshua Bengio: Summary Introduction Bengio reflects on his year of advocating for AI safety, learning through debates, and synthesizing global expert views in the International Scientific Report on AI safety. He revisits arguments against AI safety concerns and shares his evolved perspective on the potential catastrophic risks of AGI and ASI. Headings and Summary The Importance of AI Safety Despite differing views, there is a consensus on the need to address risks associated with AGI and ASI. The main concern is the unknown moral and behavioral control over such entities. Arguments Dismissing AGI/ASI Risks Skeptics argue AGI/ASI is either impossible or too far in the future to worry about now. Bengio refutes this, stating we cannot be certain about the timeline and need to prepare regulatory frameworks proactively. For those who think AGI and ASI are impossible or far in the future He challenges the idea that current AI capabilities are far from human-level intelligence, citing historical underestimations of AI advancements. The trend of AI capabilities suggests we might reach AGI/ASI sooner than expected. For those who think AGI is possible but only in many decades Regulatory and safety measures need time to develop, necessitating action now despite uncertainties about AGI’s timeline. For those who think that we may reach AGI but not ASI Bengio argues that even AGI presents significant risks and could quickly lead to ASI, making it crucial to address these dangers. For those who think that AGI and ASI will be kind to us He counters the optimism that AGI/ASI will align with human goals, emphasizing the need for robust control mechanisms to prevent AI from pursuing harmful objectives. For those who think that corporations will only design well-behaving AIs and existing laws are sufficient Profit motives often conflict with safety, and existing laws may not adequately address AI-specific risks and loopholes. For those who think that we should accelerate AI capabilities research and not delay benefits of AGI Bengio warns against prioritizing short-term benefits over long-term risks, advocating for a balanced approach that includes safety research. For those concerned that talking about catastrophic risks will hurt efforts to mitigate short-term human-rights issues with AI Addressing both short-term and long-term AI risks can be complementary, and ignoring catastrophic risks would be irresponsible given their potential impact. For those concerned with the US-China cold war AI development should consider global risks and seek collaborative safety research to prevent catastrophic mistakes that transcend national borders. For those who think that international treaties will not work While challenging, international treaties on AI safety are essential and feasible, especially with mechanisms like hardware-enabled governance. For those who think the genie is out of the bottle and we should just let go and avoid regulation Despite AI's unstoppable progress, regulation and safety measures are still critical to steer AI development towards positive outcomes. For those who think that open-source AGI code and weights are the solution Open-sourcing AI has benefits but also significant risks, requiring careful consideration and governance to prevent misuse and loss of control. For those who think worrying about AGI is falling for Pascal’s wager Bengio argues that AI risks are substantial and non-negligible, warranting serious attention and proactive mitigation efforts. Conclusion Bengio emphasizes the need for a collective, cautious approach to AI development, balancing the pursuit of benefits with rigorous safety measures to prevent catastrophic outcomes.

[P] The Big Sleep: Text-to-image generation using BigGAN and OpenAI's CLIP via a Google Colab notebook from Twitter user Adverb

From https://twitter.com/advadnoun/status/1351038053033406468: The Big Sleep Here's the notebook for generating images by using CLIP to guide BigGAN. It's very much unstable and a prototype, but it's also a fair place to start. I'll likely update it as time goes on. colab.research.google.com/drive/1NCceX2mbiKOSlAd\o7IU7nA9UskKN5WR?usp=sharing I am not the developer of The Big Sleep. This is the developer's Twitter account; this is the developer's Reddit account. Steps to follow to generate the first image in a given Google Colab session: Optionally, if this is your first time using Google Colab, view this Colab introduction and/or this Colab FAQ. Click this link. Sign into your Google account if you're not already signed in. Click the "S" button in the upper right to do this. Note: Being signed into a Google account has privacy ramifications, such as your Google search history being recorded in your Google account. In the Table of Contents, click "Parameters". Find the line that reads "tx = clip.tokenize('''a cityscape in the style of Van Gogh''')" and change the text inside of the single quote marks to your desired text; example: "tx = clip.tokenize('''a photo of New York City''')". The developer recommends that you keep the three single quote marks on both ends of your desired text so that mult-line text can be used An alternative is to remove two of the single quotes on each end of your desired text; example: "tx = clip.tokenize('a photo of New York City')". In the Table of Contents, click "Restart the kernel...". Position the pointer over the first cell in the notebook, which starts with text "import subprocess". Click the play button (the triangle) to run the cell. Wait until the cell completes execution. Click menu item "Runtime->Restart and run all". In the Table of Contents, click "Diagnostics". The output appears near the end of the Train cell that immediately precedes the Diagnostics cell, so scroll up a bit. Every few minutes (or perhaps 10 minutes if Google assigned you relatively slow hardware for this session), a new image will appear in the Train cell that is a refinement of the previous image. This process can go on for as long as you want until Google ends your Google Colab session, which is a total of up to 12 hours for the free version of Google Colab. Steps to follow if you want to start a different run using the same Google Colab session: Click menu item "Runtime->Interrupt execution". Save any images that you want to keep by right-clicking on them and using the appropriate context menu command. Optionally, change the desired text. Different runs using the same desired text almost always results in different outputs. Click menu item "Runtime->Restart and run all". Steps to follow when you're done with your Google Colab session: Click menu item "Runtime->Manage sessions". Click "Terminate" to end the session. Optionally, log out of your Google account due to the privacy ramifications of being logged into a Google account. The first output image in the Train cell (using the notebook's default of seeing every 100th image generated) usually is a very poor match to the desired text, but the second output image often is a decent match to the desired text. To change the default of seeing every 100th image generated, change the number 100 in line "if itt % 100 == 0:" in the Train cell to the desired number. For free-tier Google Colab users, I recommend changing 100 to a small integer such as 5. Tips for the text descriptions that you supply: In Section 3.1.4 of OpenAI's CLIP paper (pdf), the authors recommend using a text description of the form "A photo of a {label}." or "A photo of a {label}, a type of {type}." for images that are photographs. A Reddit user gives these tips. The Big Sleep should generate these 1,000 types of things better on average than other types of things. Here is an article containing a high-level description of how The Big Sleep works. The Big Sleep uses a modified version of BigGAN as its image generator component. The Big Sleep uses the ViT-B/32 CLIP model to rate how well a given image matches your desired text. The best CLIP model according to the CLIP paper authors is the (as of this writing) unreleased ViT-L/14-336px model; see Table 10 on page 40 of the CLIP paper (pdf) for a comparison. There are many other sites/programs/projects that use CLIP to steer image/video creation to match a text description. Some relevant subreddits: r/bigsleep (subreddit for images/videos generated from text-to-image machine learning algorithms). r/deepdream (subreddit for images/videos generated from machine learning algorithms). r/mediasynthesis (subreddit for media generation/manipulation techniques that use artificial intelligence; this subreddit shouldn't be used to post images/videos unless new techniques are demonstrated, or the images/videos are of high quality relative to other posts). Example using text 'a black cat sleeping on top of a red clock': https://preview.redd.it/7xq58v7022c61.png?width=512&format=png&auto=webp&s=a229ae9add555cd1caba31c42b60d907ffe67773 Example using text 'the word ''hot'' covered in ice': https://preview.redd.it/6kxdp8u3k2c61.png?width=512&format=png&auto=webp&s=5bd078b0111575f5d88a1dc53b0aeb933f3b0da6 Example using text 'a monkey holding a green lightsaber': https://preview.redd.it/rdsybsoaz2c61.png?width=512&format=png&auto=webp&s=2769d4c6c883c1c35ae0b1c629bebe9bc1d41393 Example using text 'The White House in Washington D.C. at night with green and red spotlights shining on it': https://preview.redd.it/w4mg90xsf5c61.png?width=512&format=png&auto=webp&s=5f18318de2f77bcd8a86e71e87048fadd30383d1 Example using text '''A photo of the Golden Gate Bridge at night, illuminated by spotlights in a tribute to Prince''': https://preview.redd.it/cn4ecuafhic61.png?width=512&format=png&auto=webp&s=397c838fdc49f13c5f17110b92c78b95bf0dcac0 Example using text '''a Rembrandt-style painting titled "Robert Plant decides whether to take the stairway to heaven or the ladder to heaven"''': https://preview.redd.it/h7rb3y6j5jc61.png?width=512&format=png&auto=webp&s=537bfe8210af185647b00e7585c948aa2c4e0ffb Example using text '''A photo of the Empire State Building being shot at with the laser cannons of a TIE fighter.''': https://preview.redd.it/cwi7i639c5d61.png?width=512&format=png&auto=webp&s=0510c8b93adb40eee4d3f41607f1c215d41e55ff Example using text '''A cartoon of a new mascot for the Reddit subreddit DeepDream that has a mouse-like face and wears a cape''': https://preview.redd.it/wtxbduevcbd61.png?width=512&format=png&auto=webp&s=c5d266258922bc62f25c80a08cd9cabc07d9cb1c Example using text '''Bugs Bunny meets the Eye of Sauron, drawn in the Looney Tunes cartoon style''': https://preview.redd.it/gmljaeekuid61.png?width=512&format=png&auto=webp&s=9ea578de165e12afc3a62bf6886bc1ae9dc19bec Example using text '''Photo of a blue and red neon-colored frog at night.''': https://preview.redd.it/nzlypte6wzd61.png?width=512&format=png&auto=webp&s=7e10b06f22cfc57c64b6d05738c7486b895083df Example using text '''Hell begins to freeze over''': https://preview.redd.it/vn99we9ngmf61.png?width=512&format=png&auto=webp&s=2408efd607f0ab40a08db6ee67448791aa813993 Example using text '''A scene with vibrant colors''': https://preview.redd.it/4z133mvrgmf61.png?width=512&format=png&auto=webp&s=b78e7a8e3f736769655056093a9904ff09a355a1 Example using text '''The Great Pyramids were turned into prisms by a wizard''': https://preview.redd.it/zxt6op7vgmf61.png?width=512&format=png&auto=webp&s=53e578cfde14b28afe27957e95e610b89afadd44

[D] An Opinionated Introduction to AutoML and Neural Architecture Search - Rachel Thomas [fast.ai]

[D] Do you know any tools (libraries/frameworks) that are intuitive enough for teenagers for a practical introduction to AI?

Hello, I am a computer science student and I am trying to set up a workshop for high-school students to give them a first hands-on introduction to AI, more specifically to computer vision. So, I was wondering if you know any frameworks or tools or libraries that would raise awareness about AI and give a first incentive about it to teenagers.Any help would be very much appreciated!Cheers!

[N] How Stability AI’s Founder Tanked His Billion-Dollar Startup

forbes article: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrickcai/2024/03/29/how-stability-ais-founder-tanked-his-billion-dollar-startup/ archive no paywall: https://archive.is/snbeV How Stability AI’s Founder Tanked His Billion-Dollar Startup Mar 29, 2024 Stability AI founder Emad Mostaque took the stage last week at the Terranea Resort in Palos Verdes, California to roaring applause and an introduction from an AI-generated Aristotle who announced him as “a modern Prometheus” with “the astuteness of Athena and the vision of Daedalus.” “Under his stewardship, AI becomes the Herculean force poised to vanquish the twin serpents of illness and ailment and extend the olive branch of longevity,” the faux Aristotle proclaimed. “I think that’s the best intro I’ve ever had,” Mostaque said. But behind Mostaque's hagiographic introduction lay a grim and fast metastasizing truth. Stability, once one of AI’s buzziest startups, was floundering. It had been running out of money for months and Mostaque had been unable to secure enough additional funding. It had defaulted on payments to Amazon whose cloud service undergirded Stability’s core offerings. The star research team behind its flagship text-to-image generator Stable Diffusion had tendered their resignations just three days before — as Forbes would first report — and other senior leaders had issued him an ultimatum: resign, or we walk too. Still, onstage before a massive audience of peers and acolytes, Mostaque talked a big game. “AI is jet planes for the mind,” he opined. “AI is our collective intelligence. It's the human Colossus.” He claimed a new, faster version of the Stable Diffusion image generator released earlier this month could generate “200 cats with hats per second.” But later, when he was asked about Stability’s financial model, Mostaque fumbled. “I can’t say that publicly,” he replied. “But it’s going well. We’re ahead of forecast.” Four days later, Mostaque stepped down as CEO of Stability, as Forbes first reported. In a post to X, the service formerly known as Twitter, he claimed he’d voluntarily abdicated his role to decentralize “the concentration of power in AI.” But sources told Forbes that was hardly the case. Behind the scenes, Mostaque had fought to maintain his position and control despite mounting pressure externally and internally to step down. Company documents and interviews with 32 current and former employees, investors, collaborators and industry observers suggest his abrupt exit was the result of poor business judgment and wild overspending that undermined confidence in his vision and leadership, and ultimately kneecapped the company. Mostaque, through his attorneys, declined to comment on record on a detailed list of questions about the reporting in this story. But in an email to Forbes earlier this week he broadly disputed the allegations. “Nobody tells you how hard it is to be a CEO and there are better CEOs than me to scale a business,” he said in a statement. “I am not sure anyone else would have been able to build and grow the research team to build the best and most widely used models out there and I’m very proud of the team there. I look forward to moving onto the next problem to handle and hopefully move the needle.” In an emailed statement, Christian Laforte and Shan Shan Wong, the interim co-CEOs who replaced Mostaque, said, "the company remains focused on commercializing its world leading technology” and providing it “to partners across the creative industries." After starting Stability in 2019, Mostaque built the company into an early AI juggernaut by seizing upon a promising research project that would become Stable Diffusion and funding it into a business reality. The ease with which the software generated detailed images from the simplest text prompts immediately captivated the public: 10 million people used it on any given day, the company told Forbes in early 2023. For some true believers, Mostaque was a crucial advocate for open-source AI development in a space dominated by the closed systems of OpenAI, Google and Anthropic. But his startup’s rise to one of the buzziest in generative AI was in part built on a series of exaggerations and misleading claims, as Forbes first reported last year (Mostaque disputed some points at the time). And they continued after he raised $100 million at a $1 billion valuation just days after launching Stable Diffusion in 2022. His failure to deliver on an array of grand promises, like building bespoke AI models for nation states, and his decision to pour tens of millions into research without a sustainable business plan, eroded Stability’s foundations and jeopardized its future. "He was just giving shit away,” one former employee told Forbes. “That man legitimately wanted to transform the world. He actually wanted to train AI models for kids in Malawi. Was it practical? Absolutely not." By October 2023, Stability would have less than $4 million left in the bank, according to an internal memo prepared for a board meeting and reviewed by Forbes. And mounting debt, including months of overdue Amazon Web Services payments, had already left it in the red. To avoid legal penalties for skipping Americans staff’s payroll, the document explained, the London-based startup was considering delaying tax payments to the U.K. government. It was Stability’s armada of GPUs, the wildly powerful and equally expensive chips undergirding AI, that were so taxing the company’s finances. Hosted by AWS, they had long been one of Mostaque’s bragging points; he often touted them as one of the world’s 10 largest supercomputers. They were responsible for helping Stability’s researchers build and maintain one of the top AI image generators, as well as break important new ground on generative audio, video and 3D models. “Undeniably, Stability has continued to ship a lot of models,” said one former employee. “They may not have profited off of it, but the broader ecosystem benefitted in a huge, huge way.” But the costs associated with so much compute were now threatening to sink the company. According to an internal October financial forecast seen by Forbes, Stability was on track to spend $99 million on compute in 2023. It noted as well that Stability was “underpaying AWS bills for July (by $1M)” and “not planning to pay AWS at the end of October for August usage ($7M).” Then there were the September and October bills, plus $1 million owed to Google Cloud and $600,000 to GPU cloud data center CoreWeave. (Amazon, Google and CoreWeave declined to comment.) With an additional $54 million allocated to wages and operating expenses, Stability’s total projected costs for 2023 were $153 million. But according to its October financial report, its projected revenue for the calendar year was just $11 million. Stability was on track to lose more money per month than it made in an entire year. The company’s dire financial position had thoroughly soured Stability’s current investors, including Coatue, which had invested tens of millions in the company during its $101 million funding round in 2022. In the middle of 2023, Mostaque agreed to an independent audit after Coatue raised a series of concerns, according to a source with direct knowledge of the matter. The outcome of the investigation is unclear. Coatue declined to comment. Within a week of an early October board meeting where Mostaque shared that financial forecast, Lightspeed Venture Partners, another major investor, sent a letter to the board urging them to sell the company. The distressing numbers had “severely undermined” the firm’s confidence in Mostaque’s ability to lead the company. “In particular, we are surprised and deeply concerned by a cash position just now disclosed to us that is inconsistent with prior discussions on this topic,” Lightspeed’s general counsel Brett Nissenberg wrote in the letter, a copy of which was viewed by Forbes. “Lightspeed believes that the company is not likely financeable on terms that would assure the company’s long term sound financial position.” (Lightspeed declined a request for comment.) The calls for a sale led Stability to quietly begin looking for a buyer. Bloomberg reported in November that Stability approached AI startups Cohere and Jasper to gauge their interest. Stability denied this, and Jasper CEO Timothy Young did the same when reached for comment by Forbes. A Cohere representative declined to comment. But one prominent AI company confirmed that Mostaque’s representatives had reached out to them to test the waters. Those talks did not advance because “the numbers didn’t add up,” this person, who declined to be named due to the confidential nature of the talks, told Forbes. Stability also tried to court Samsung as a buyer, going so far as to redecorate its office in advance of a planned meeting with the Korean electronics giant. (Samsung said that it invested in Stability in 2023 and that it does not comment on M&A discussions.) Coatue had been calling for Mostaque’s resignation for months, according to a source with direct knowledge. But it and other investors were unable to oust him because he was the company’s majority shareholder. When they tried a different tact by rallying other investors to offer him a juicy equity package to resign, Mostaque refused, said two sources. By October, Coatue and Lightspeed had had enough. Coatue left the board and Lightspeed resigned its observer seat. “Emad infuriated our initial investors so much it’s just making it impossible for us to raise more money under acceptable terms,” one current Stability executive told Forbes. The early months of 2024 saw Stability’s already precarious position eroding further still. Employees were quietly laid off. Three people in a position to know estimated that at least 10% of staff were cut. And cash reserves continued to dwindle. Mostaque mentioned a lifeline at the October board meeting: $95 million in tentative funding from new investors, pending due diligence. But in the end, only a fraction of it was wired, two sources say, much of it from Intel, which Forbes has learned invested $20 million, a fraction of what was reported. (Intel did not return a request for comment by publication time.) Two hours after Forbes broke the news of Mostaque’s plans to step down as CEO, Stability issued a press release confirming his resignation. Chief operating officer Wong and chief technology officer Laforte have taken over in the interim. Mostaque, who said on X that he still owns a majority of the company, also stepped down from the board, which has now initiated a search for a permanent CEO. There is a lot of work to be done to turn things around, and very little time in which to do it. Said the current Stability executive, “There’s still a possibility of a turnaround story, but the odds drop by the day.” In July of 2023, Mostaque still thought he could pull it off. Halfway through the month, he shared a fundraising plan with his lieutenants. It was wildly optimistic, detailing the raise of $500 million in cash and another $750 million in computing facilities from marquee investors like Nvidia, Google, Intel and the World Bank (Nvidia and Google declined comment. Intel did not respond. The World Bank said it did not invest in Stability). In a Slack message reviewed by Forbes, Mostaque said Google was “willing to move fast” and the round was “likely to be oversubscribed.” It wasn’t. Three people with direct knowledge of these fundraising efforts told Forbes that while there was some interest in Stability, talks often stalled when it came time to disclose financials. Two of them noted that earlier in the year, Mostaque had simply stopped engaging with VCs who asked for numbers. Only one firm invested around that time: actor Ashton Kutcher’s Sound Ventures, which invested $35 million in the form of a convertible SAFE note during the second quarter, according to an internal document. (Sound Ventures did not respond to a request for comment.) And though he’d managed to score a meeting with Nvidia and its CEO Jensen Huang, it ended in disaster, according to two sources. “Under Jensen's microscopic questions, Emad just fell apart,” a source in position to know told Forbes. Huang quickly concluded Stability wasn’t ready for an investment from Nvidia, the sources said. Mostaque told Forbes in an email that he had not met with Huang since 2022, except to say “hello and what’s up a few times after.” His July 2023 message references a plan to raise $150 million from Nvidia. (Nvidia declined to comment.) After a June Forbes investigation citing more than 30 sources revealed Mostaque’s history of misleading claims, Mostaque struggled to raise funding, a Stability investor told Forbes. (Mostaque disputed the story at the time and called it "coordinated lies" in his email this week to Forbes). Increasingly, investors scrutinized his assertions and pressed for data. And Young, now the CEO of Jasper, turned down a verbal offer to be Stability’s president after reading the article, according to a source with direct knowledge of the matter. The collapse of the talks aggravated the board and other executives, who had hoped Young would compensate for the sales and business management skills that Mostaque lacked, according to four people in a position to know. (Young declined to comment.) When Stability’s senior leadership convened in London for the CogX conference in September, the financing had still not closed. There, a group of executives confronted Mostaque asking questions about the company’s cash position and runway, according to three people with direct knowledge of the incident. They did not get the clarity they’d hoped for. By October, Mostaque had reduced his fundraising target by more than 80%. The months that followed saw a steady drumbeat of departures — general counsel Adam Avrunin, vice presidents Mike Melnicki, Ed Newton-Rex and Joe Penna, chief people officer Ozden Onder — culminating in the demoralizing March exit of Stable Diffusion’s primary developers Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Patrick Esser and Dominik Lorenz. Rombach, who led the team, had been angling to leave for months, two sources said, first threatening to resign last summer because of the fundraising failures. Others left over concerns about cash flow, as well as liabilities — including what four people described as Mostaque’s lax approach to ensuring that Stability products could not be used to produce child sexual abuse imagery. “Stability AI is committed to preventing the misuse of AI and prohibits the use of our image models and services for unlawful activity, including attempts to edit or create CSAM,” Ella Irwin, senior vice president of integrity, said in a statement. Newton-Rex told Forbes he resigned because he disagreed with Stability’s position that training AI on copyrighted work without consent is fair use. Melnicki and Penna declined to comment. Avrunin and Onder could not be reached for comment. None of the researchers responded to requests for comment. The Stable Diffusion researchers’ departure as a cohort says a lot about the state of Stability AI. The company’s researchers were widely viewed as its crown jewels, their work subsidized with a firehose of pricey compute power that was even extended to people outside the company. Martino Russi, an artificial intelligence researcher, told Forbes that though he was never formally employed by Stability, the company provided him a “staggering” amount of compute between January and April 2023 to play around with developing an AI video generator that Stability might someday use. “It was Candy Land or Coney Island,” said Russi, who estimates that his experiment, which was ultimately shelved, cost the company $2.5 million. Stable Diffusion was simultaneously Stability’s marquee product and its existential cash crisis. One current employee described it to Forbes as “a giant vacuum that absorbed everything: money, compute, people.” While the software was widely used, with Mostaque claiming downloads reaching into the hundreds of millions, Stability struggled to translate that wild success into revenue. Mostaque knew it could be done — peers at Databricks, Elastic and MongoDB had all turned a free product into a lucrative business — he just couldn’t figure out how. His first attempt was Stability’s API, which allowed paying customers to integrate Stable Diffusion into their own products. In early 2023, a handful of small companies, like art generator app NightCafe and presentation software startup Tome, signed on, according to four people with knowledge of the deals. But Stability’s poor account management services soured many, and in a matter of months NightCafe and Tome canceled their contracts, three people said. NightCafe founder Angus Russell told Forbes that his company switched to a competitor which “offered much cheaper inference costs and a broader service.” Tome did not respond to a request for comment. Meanwhile, Mostaque’s efforts to court larger companies like Samsung and Snapchat were failing, according to five people familiar with the effort. Canva, which was already one of the heaviest users of open-sourced Stable Diffusion, had multiple discussions with Stability, which was angling for a contract it hoped would generate several millions in annual revenue. But the deal never materialized, four sources said. “These three companies wanted and needed us,” one former employee told Forbes. “They would have been the perfect customers.” (Samsung, Snap and Canva declined to comment.) “It’s not that there was not an appetite to pay Stability — there were tons of companies that would have that wanted to,” the former employee said. “There was a huge opportunity and demand, but just a resistance to execution.” Mostaque’s other big idea was to provide governments with bespoke national AI models that would invigorate their economies and citizenry. “Emad envisions a world where AI through 100 national models serves not as a tool of the few, but as a benefactor to all promising to confront great adversaries, cancer, autism, and the sands of time itself,” the AI avatar of Aristotle said in his intro at the conference. Mostaque told several prospective customers that he could deliver such models within 60 days — an untenable timeline, according to two people in position to know. Stability attempted to develop a model for the Singaporean government over the protestation of employees who questioned its technical feasibility, three sources familiar with the effort told Forbes. But it couldn’t pull it off and Singapore never became a customer. (The government of Singapore confirmed it did not enter into a deal with Stability, but declined to answer additional questions.) As Stability careened from one new business idea to another, resources were abruptly reallocated and researchers reassigned. The whiplash shifts in a largely siloed organization demoralized and infuriated employees. “There were ‘urgent’ things, ‘urgent urgent’ things and ‘most urgent,’” one former employee complained. “None of these things seem important if everything is important.” Another former Stability executive was far more pointed in their assessment. “Emad is the most disorganized leader I have ever worked with in my career,” this person told Forbes. “He has no vision, and changes directions every week, often based on what he sees on Twitter.” In a video interview posted shortly before this story was published, Mostaque explained his leadership style: “I'm particularly great at taking creatives, developers, researchers, others, and achieving their full potential in designing systems. But I should not be dealing with, you know, HR and operations and business development and other elements. There are far better people than me to do that.” By December 2023, Stability had partially abandoned its open-source roots and announced that any commercial use of Stable Diffusion would cost customers at least $20 per month (non-commercial and research use of Stable Diffusion would remain free). But privately, Stability was considering a potentially more lucrative source of revenue: reselling the compute it was leasing from providers like AWS, according to six people familiar with the effort. Though it was essentially GPU arbitrage, Stability framed the strategy to investors as a “managed services” offering. Its damning October financial report projected optimistically that such an offering would bring in $139 million in 2024 — 98% of its revenue. Multiple employees at the time told Forbes they feared reselling compute, even if the company called it “managed services,” would violate the terms of Stability’s contract with AWS. Amazon declined to comment. “The line internally was that we are not reselling compute,” one former employee said. “This was some of the dirtiest feeling stuff.” Stability also discussed reselling a cluster of Nvidia A100 chips, leased via CoreWeave, to the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, three sources said. “It was under the guise of managed services, but there wasn’t any management happening,” one of these people told Forbes. Andreessen Horowitz and CoreWeave declined to comment. Stability did not respond to questions about if it plans to continue this strategy now that Mostaque is out of the picture. Regardless, interim co-CEOs Wong and Laforte are on a tight timeline to clean up his mess. Board chairman Jim O’Shaughnessy said in a statement that he was confident the pair “will adeptly steer the company forward in developing and commercializing industry-leading generative AI products.” But burn continues to far outpace revenue. The Financial Times reported Friday that the company made $5.4 million of revenue in February, against $8 million in costs. Several sources said there are ongoing concerns about making payroll for the roughly 150 remaining employees. Leadership roles have gone vacant for months amid the disarray, leaving the company increasingly directionless. Meanwhile, a potentially catastrophic legal threat looms over the company: A trio of copyright infringement lawsuits brought by Getty Images and a group of artists in the U.S. and U.K., who claim Stability illegally used their art and photography to train the AI models powering Stable Diffusion. A London-based court has already rejected the company’s bid to throw out one of the lawsuits on the basis that none of its researchers were based in the U.K. And Stability’s claim that Getty’s Delaware lawsuit should be blocked because it's a U.K.-based company was rejected. (Stability did not respond to questions about the litigation.) AI-related copyright litigation “could go on for years,” according to Eric Goldman, a law professor at Santa Clara University. He told Forbes that though plaintiffs suing AI firms face an uphill battle overcoming the existing legal precedent on copyright infringement, the quantity of arguments available to make are virtually inexhaustible. “Like in military theory, if there’s a gap in your lines, that’s where the enemy pours through — if any one of those arguments succeeds, it could completely change the generative AI environment,” he said. “In some sense, generative AI as an industry has to win everything.” Stability, which had more than $100 million in the bank just a year and a half ago, is in a deep hole. Not only does it need more funding, it needs a viable business model — or a buyer with the vision and chops to make it successful in a fast-moving and highly competitive sector. At an all hands meeting this past Monday, Stability’s new leaders detailed a path forward. One point of emphasis: a plan to better manage resources and expenses, according to one person in attendance. It’s a start, but Mostaque’s meddling has left them with little runway to execute. His resignation, though, has given some employees hope. “A few people are 100% going to reconsider leaving after today,” said one current employee. “And the weird gloomy aura of hearing Emad talking nonsense for an hour is gone.” Shortly before Mostaque resigned, one current Stability executive told Forbes that they were optimistic his departure could make Stability appealing enough to receive a small investment or sale to a friendly party. “There are companies that have raised hundreds of millions of dollars that have much less intrinsic value than Stability,” the person said. “A white knight may still appear.”

[D] I don't really trust papers out of "Top Labs" anymore

I mean, I trust that the numbers they got are accurate and that they really did the work and got the results. I believe those. It's just that, take the recent "An Evolutionary Approach to Dynamic Introduction of Tasks in Large-scale Multitask Learning Systems" paper. It's 18 pages of talking through this pretty convoluted evolutionary and multitask learning algorithm, it's pretty interesting, solves a bunch of problems. But two notes. One, the big number they cite as the success metric is 99.43 on CIFAR-10, against a SotA of 99.40, so woop-de-fucking-doo in the grand scheme of things. Two, there's a chart towards the end of the paper that details how many TPU core-hours were used for just the training regimens that results in the final results. The sum total is 17,810 core-hours. Let's assume that for someone who doesn't work at Google, you'd have to use on-demand pricing of $3.22/hr. This means that these trained models cost $57,348. Strictly speaking, throwing enough compute at a general enough genetic algorithm will eventually produce arbitrarily good performance, so while you can absolutely read this paper and collect interesting ideas about how to use genetic algorithms to accomplish multitask learning by having each new task leverage learned weights from previous tasks by defining modifications to a subset of components of a pre-existing model, there's a meta-textual level on which this paper is just "Jeff Dean spent enough money to feed a family of four for half a decade to get a 0.03% improvement on CIFAR-10." OpenAI is far and away the worst offender here, but it seems like everyone's doing it. You throw a fuckton of compute and a light ganache of new ideas at an existing problem with existing data and existing benchmarks, and then if your numbers are infinitesimally higher than their numbers, you get to put a lil' sticker on your CV. Why should I trust that your ideas are even any good? I can't check them, I can't apply them to my own projects. Is this really what we're comfortable with as a community? A handful of corporations and the occasional university waving their dicks at everyone because they've got the compute to burn and we don't? There's a level at which I think there should be a new journal, exclusively for papers in which you can replicate their experimental results in under eight hours on a single consumer GPU.

[P] MIT Introduction to Data-Centric AI

Announcing the first-ever course on Data-Centric AI. Learn how to train better ML models by improving the data. Course homepage | Lecture videos on YouTube | Lab Assignments The course covers: Data-Centric AI vs. Model-Centric AI Label Errors Dataset Creation and Curation Data-centric Evaluation of ML Models Class Imbalance, Outliers, and Distribution Shift Growing or Compressing Datasets Interpretability in Data-Centric ML Encoding Human Priors: Data Augmentation and Prompt Engineering Data Privacy and Security MIT, like most universities, has many courses on machine learning (6.036, 6.867, and many others). Those classes teach techniques to produce effective models for a given dataset, and the classes focus heavily on the mathematical details of models rather than practical applications. However, in real-world applications of ML, the dataset is not fixed, and focusing on improving the data often gives better results than improving the model. We’ve personally seen this time and time again in our applied ML work as well as our research. Data-Centric AI (DCAI) is an emerging science that studies techniques to improve datasets in a systematic/algorithmic way — given that this topic wasn’t covered in the standard curriculum, we (a group of PhD candidates and grads) thought that we should put together a new class! We taught this intensive 2-week course in January over MIT’s IAP term, and we’ve just published all the course material, including lecture videos, lecture notes, hands-on lab assignments, and lab solutions, in hopes that people outside the MIT community would find these resources useful. We’d be happy to answer any questions related to the class or DCAI in general, and we’d love to hear any feedback on how we can improve the course material. Introduction to Data-Centric AI is open-source opencourseware, so feel free to make improvements directly: https://github.com/dcai-course/dcai-course.

UC Berkeley and Berkeley AI Research published all materials of CS 188: Introduction to Artificial Intelligence, Fall 2018

France's strategy for AI - AI for Humanity summit is taking place in Paris - DeepMind opening their first AI research lab in Paris

[N] OpenAI bot beat best Dota 2 players in 1v1 at The International 2017

[R] OpenAi Retro and Evolutionary Strategies

I have not seen much about OpenAi in this community, but i hope that maybe someone can still help me out. I am trying to train a Gameboy game from OpenAi Retro and i found this blog post from OpenAi. Does anyone have expierence with this kind of training? and is it any good? I have also found an implementention here. Has anyone expierience with this? ​

[D] What kind of reinforcement learning algorithm would you recommend for training AI for a strategy game like Risk or Axis&Allies?

The challenge being multiple stages of the game (buy, move/attack, place...) and dice rolls.

[N] OpenAI's new language model gpt-3.5-turbo-instruct can defeat chess engine Fairy-Stockfish 14 at level 5

This Twitter thread (Nitter alternative for those who aren't logged into Twitter and want to see the full thread) claims that OpenAI's new language model gpt-3.5-turbo-instruct can "readily" beat Lichess Stockfish level 4 (Lichess Stockfish level and its rating) and has a chess rating of "around 1800 Elo." This tweet shows the style of prompts that are being used to get these results with the new language model. I used website parrotchess\[dot\]com (discovered here) (EDIT: parrotchess doesn't exist anymore, as of March 7, 2024) to play multiple games of chess purportedly pitting this new language model vs. various levels at website Lichess, which supposedly uses Fairy-Stockfish 14 according to the Lichess user interface. My current results for all completed games: The language model is 5-0 vs. Fairy-Stockfish 14 level 5 (game 1, game 2, game 3, game 4, game 5), and 2-5 vs. Fairy-Stockfish 14 level 6 (game 1, game 2, game 3, game 4, game 5, game 6, game 7). Not included in the tally are games that I had to abort because the parrotchess user interface stalled (5 instances), because I accidentally copied a move incorrectly in the parrotchess user interface (numerous instances), or because the parrotchess user interface doesn't allow the promotion of a pawn to anything other than queen (1 instance). Update: There could have been up to 5 additional losses - the number of times the parrotchess user interface stalled - that would have been recorded in this tally if this language model resignation bug hadn't been present. Also, the quality of play of some online chess bots can perhaps vary depending on the speed of the user's hardware. The following is a screenshot from parrotchess showing the end state of the first game vs. Fairy-Stockfish 14 level 5: https://preview.redd.it/4ahi32xgjmpb1.jpg?width=432&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7fbb68371ca4257bed15ab2828fab58047f194a4 The game results in this paragraph are from using parrotchess after the forementioned resignation bug was fixed. The language model is 0-1 vs. Fairy-Stockfish level 7 (game 1), and 0-1 vs. Fairy-Stockfish 14 level 8 (game 1). There is one known scenario (Nitter alternative) in which the new language model purportedly generated an illegal move using language model sampling temperature of 0. Previous purported illegal moves that the parrotchess developer examined turned out (Nitter alternative) to be due to parrotchess bugs. There are several other ways to play chess against the new language model if you have access to the OpenAI API. The first way is to use the OpenAI Playground as shown in this video. The second way is chess web app gptchess\[dot\]vercel\[dot\]app (discovered in this Twitter thread / Nitter thread). Third, another person modified that chess web app to additionally allow various levels of the Stockfish chess engine to autoplay, resulting in chess web app chessgpt-stockfish\[dot\]vercel\[dot\]app (discovered in this tweet). Results from other people: a) Results from hundreds of games in blog post Debunking the Chessboard: Confronting GPTs Against Chess Engines to Estimate Elo Ratings and Assess Legal Move Abilities. b) Results from 150 games: GPT-3.5-instruct beats GPT-4 at chess and is a \~1800 ELO chess player. Results of 150 games of GPT-3.5 vs stockfish and 30 of GPT-3.5 vs GPT-4. Post #2. The developer later noted that due to bugs the legal move rate was actually above 99.9%. It should also be noted that these results didn't use a language model sampling temperature of 0, which I believe could have induced illegal moves. c) Chess bot gpt35-turbo-instruct at website Lichess. d) Chess bot konaz at website Lichess. From blog post Playing chess with large language models: Computers have been better than humans at chess for at least the last 25 years. And for the past five years, deep learning models have been better than the best humans. But until this week, in order to be good at chess, a machine learning model had to be explicitly designed to play games: it had to be told explicitly that there was an 8x8 board, that there were different pieces, how each of them moved, and what the goal of the game was. Then it had to be trained with reinforcement learning agaist itself. And then it would win. This all changed on Monday, when OpenAI released GPT-3.5-turbo-instruct, an instruction-tuned language model that was designed to just write English text, but that people on the internet quickly discovered can play chess at, roughly, the level of skilled human players. Post Chess as a case study in hidden capabilities in ChatGPT from last month covers a different prompting style used for the older chat-based GPT 3.5 Turbo language model. If I recall correctly from my tests with ChatGPT-3.5, using that prompt style with the older language model can defeat Stockfish level 2 at Lichess, but I haven't been successful in using it to beat Stockfish level 3. In my tests, both the quality of play and frequency of illegal attempted moves seems to be better with the new prompt style with the new language model compared to the older prompt style with the older language model. Related article: Large Language Model: world models or surface statistics? P.S. Since some people claim that language model gpt-3.5-turbo-instruct is always playing moves memorized from the training dataset, I searched for data on the uniqueness of chess positions. From this video, we see that for a certain game dataset there were 763,331,945 chess positions encountered in an unknown number of games without removing duplicate chess positions, 597,725,848 different chess positions reached, and 582,337,984 different chess positions that were reached only once. Therefore, for that game dataset the probability that a chess position in a game was reached only once is 582337984 / 763331945 = 76.3%. For the larger dataset cited in that video, there are approximately (506,000,000 - 200,000) games in the dataset (per this paper), and 21,553,382,902 different game positions encountered. Each game in the larger dataset added a mean of approximately 21,553,382,902 / (506,000,000 - 200,000) = 42.6 different chess positions to the dataset. For this different dataset of \~12 million games, \~390 million different chess positions were encountered. Each game in this different dataset added a mean of approximately (390 million / 12 million) = 32.5 different chess positions to the dataset. From the aforementioned numbers, we can conclude that a strategy of playing only moves memorized from a game dataset would fare poorly because there are not rarely new chess games that have chess positions that are not present in the game dataset.

[D] Advice for spotting "fake" ML roles?

I recently got hired for what turned out to be a fake ML role even by the loosest definition of an ML role (Bloomberg AI group). It seems like currently there are many companies/teams/people who pretend to do ML work and when it comes to hiring they lie to candidates about the work they actually do. Does anyone have any strategies to spot these kinds of roles so they can be avoided? It seems like asking questions during the interview is not very effective because you could easily just be lied to.

[D] AI Agents: too early, too expensive, too unreliable

Reference: Full blog post There has been a lot of hype about the promise of autonomous agent-based LLM workflows. By now, all major LLMs are capable of interacting with external tools and functions, letting the LLM perform sequences of tasks automatically. But reality is proving more challenging than anticipated. The WebArena leaderboard, which benchmarks LLMs agents against real-world tasks, shows that even the best-performing models have a success rate of only 35.8%. Challenges in Practice After seeing many attempts to AI agents, I believe it's too early, too expensive, too slow, too unreliable. It feels like many AI agent startups are waiting for a model breakthrough that will start the race to productize agents. Reliability: As we all know, LLMs are prone to hallucinations and inconsistencies. Chaining multiple AI steps compounds these issues, especially for tasks requiring exact outputs. Performance and costs: GPT-4o, Gemini-1.5, and Claude Opus are working quite well with tool usage/function calling, but they are still slow and expensive, particularly if you need to do loops and automatic retries. Legal concerns: Companies may be held liable for the mistakes of their agents. A recent example is Air Canada being ordered to pay a customer who was misled by the airline's chatbot. User trust: The "black box" nature of AI agents and stories like the above makes it hard for users to understand and trust their outputs. Gaining user trust for sensitive tasks involving payments or personal information will be hard (paying bills, shopping, etc.). Real-World Attempts Several startups are tackling the AI agent space, but most are still experimental or invite-only: adept.ai - $350M funding, but access is still very limited MultiOn - funding unknown, their API-first approach seems promising HypeWrite - $2.8M funding, started with an AI writing assistant and expanded into the agent space minion.ai - created some initial buzz but has gone quiet now, waitlist only Only MultiOn seems to be pursuing the "give it instructions and watch it go" approach, which is more in line with the promise of AI agents. All others are going down the record-and-replay RPA route, which may be necessary for reliability at this stage. Large players are also bringing AI capabilities to desktops and browsers, and it looks like we'll get native AI integrations on a system level: OpenAI announced their Mac desktop app that can interact with the OS screen. At Google I/O, Google demonstrated Gemini automatically processing a shopping return. Microsoft announced Copilot Studio, which will let developers build AI agent bots. Screenshot Screenshot These tech demos are impressive, but we'll see how well these agent capabilities will work when released publicly and tested against real-world scenarios instead of hand-picked demo cases. The Path Forward AI agents overhyped and it's too early. However, the underlying models continue to advance quickly, and we can expect to see more successful real-world applications. Instead of trying to have one large general purpose agent that is hard to control and test, we can use many smaller agents that basically just pick the right strategy for a specific sub-task in our workflows. These "agents" can be thought of as medium-sized LLM prompts with a) context and b) a set of functions available to call. The most promising path forward likely looks like this: Narrowly scoped, well testable automations that use AI as an augmentation tool rather than pursuing full autonomy Human-in-the-loop approaches that keep humans involved for oversight and handling edge cases Setting realistic expectations about current capabilities and limitations By combining tightly constrained agents, good evaluation data, human-in-the-loop oversight, and traditional engineering methods, we can achieve reliably good results for automating medium-complex tasks. Will AI agents automate tedious repetitive work, such as web scraping, form filling, and data entry? Yes, absolutely. Will AI agents autonomously book your vacation without your intervention? Unlikely, at least in the near future.

Team Polk’s Bryan Pellegrino Talks About His AI Research And How It Helped Formulate Strategies To Win $1.2 Million [P]

https://www.cardplayer.com/poker-news/25778-team-polk-s-bryan-pellegrino-talks-about-his-ai-research-and-how-it-helped-formulate-strategies-to-win-1-2-million Really interesting use of game theory. Had the honor of watching this happen live. A moment of silence to the human /r/poker players please.

[R] "o3 achieves a gold medal at the 2024 IOI and obtains a Codeforces rating on par with elite human competitors"

Competitive Programming with Large Reasoning Models OpenAI We show that reinforcement learning applied to large language models (LLMs) significantly boosts performance on complex coding and reasoning tasks. Additionally, we compare two general-purpose reasoning models - OpenAI o1 and an early checkpoint of o3 - with a domain-specific system, o1-ioi, which uses hand-engineered inference strategies designed for competing in the 2024 International Olympiad in Informatics (IOI). We competed live at IOI 2024 with o1-ioi and, using hand-crafted test-time strategies, placed in the 49th percentile. Under relaxed competition constraints, o1-ioi achieved a gold medal. However, when evaluating later models such as o3, we find that o3 achieves gold without hand-crafted domain-specific strategies or relaxed constraints. Our findings show that although specialized pipelines such as o1-ioi yield solid improvements, the scaled-up, general-purpose o3 model surpasses those results without relying on hand-crafted inference heuristics. Notably, o3 achieves a gold medal at the 2024 IOI and obtains a Codeforces rating on par with elite human competitors. Overall, these results indicate that scaling general-purpose reinforcement learning, rather than relying on domain-specific techniques, offers a robust path toward state-of-the-art AI in reasoning domains, such as competitive programming. https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.06807

[D] Lessons From the Field in Building Your MLOps Strategy with Harpreet Sahota, Data Scientist at Comet at Enterprise Data & AI - Jan 27 @ 12 PM ET

Hi r/MachineLearning! I wanted to share a webinar coming up in January 2022 at Enterprise Data & AI. I put the info from the website below along with the link if you're interested. I'm really interested in the real life case studies they mention with Uber. \--------- Featured Speaker: Harpreet Sahota, Data Scientist at Comet and host of "The Artists of Data Science" Podcast As machine learning expands and larger organizations begin deploying across bigger teams, the need to efficiently operationalize becomes critical for enterprises. In our discussions with leading organizations utilizing ML like The RealReal and Uber, we have compiled real-world case studies and organizational best practices for MLOps in the enterprise. Join us for a discussion where we'll explore the benefits of MLOps and discuss when and how to deploy MLOps in your ML. We'll review three real world case studies that will answer key questions: When to start implementing in MLOps? How to start implementing in MLOps? How to measure the value of your MLOps strategy? Agenda: 12:00pm-12:30: Featured Presentation 12:30-13:00pm: Your Q&A and interaction Link to the website: https://events.cognilytica.com/CLNjE3MHwyNA