Thanks for the thoughts :)
266 karma · joined March 26, 2021
Thanks for the thoughts :)
We made the training data for this using a physically based renderer (i.e, Cycles in Blender).
For non-photorealistic art, there are way too many ways in which artists communicate lighting (even in sketch, which is different from pixel-art / video game, there are at least a couple of ways (a) solid shading (b) hatching).
I'm not sure how to extend our methodology (synthetic data in 3D modeling software + train model) to these settings.
Ooh, I didn't know about Myst-style games. I'll definitely check them out!
This is the project page and has some cool demos (atleast I think!). Do check them out and let me know what you all think!
Over the holidays, I cleaned up the implementation (with the help of Claude Code, although this is not an advertisement for it) and released it on GitHub.
If anyone needs fast 3D packing in python, do give this a shot. Hopefully I have attributed all the code/ideas I have used from elsewhere properly (if not, please feel free to let me know).
I do think these problems are much, much worse for ISL as you rightly noted.
I think I should have been careful when I said "solve" in my post. But that really came from a place of optimism/excitement.
From my understanding, they are quite dissimilar. A person who knows ISL will not understand ASL, for example.
On a related note, this sort of explains why our model is struggling to fit on 500 hours of our current dataset (even on the training set). Even so, the current state of automatic translation for Indian Sign Language is that, in-the-wild, even individual words cannot be detected very well. We hope that what we are building might at least improve the state-of-the-art there.
> It's more of a bad and broken transliteration that if you struggle to think about you can parse out and understand.
Can you elaborate a bit more on this. Do you think if we make a system for bad/broken transliteration and funnel it through ChatGPT, it might give meaningful results? That is ChatGPT might be able to correct for errors as it is a strong language model.
As amazing as recent AI progress has been, we do overrate it a lot (I'm including myself in that).
Can you explain what you mean by motion comic generation? Sounds interesting!
* Flash Attention, an efficient attention module which significantly speeds up training, only works on Ampere GPUs [1]
* Even if I bought a 3090, I would have to get a computer to go with it, along with a PSU and some cooling. Don't know where to start with that.
P.S. I have no affiliation with his work, although I did contribute 10$ to his Kickstarter Campaign back in the day.
I wanted a solution which was agnostic to the type of the model, with respect to loading and inferring.
So I made this AutoUnloadModel class that unloads the model if it hasn't been used for some period. I used __init_subclass__ to ensure that all the details regarding timers, locks etc are hidden from the subclass.
I found __init_subclass__ very cool for this job, which is the reason I'm sharing this. Thanks!
I have implemented a query optimization algorithm for PostgreSQL. The novelty here was supposed to be that the query optimization phase could be split up into sub-optimization steps which could be executed on multiple workers parallely. I think there are not many real world use cases for this. I could only think of a contrived setting where one has to do some data-analysis on many (100s) of data sources, where searching for a join plan might be a bottleneck.
Anyway, as you will find, if you visit the repository, that I found it difficult to use threads/fork processes in Postgres in a way that was reliable and safe. I would like people's opinion on whether the use case I described earlier is a real one and if so, can we parallelize join optimization in Postgres?
In the url above, I test out two models of visual similarity (one that I developed and one that has been previously developed) to power the tool.
I have made a tool, as part of a research project, that tries to make it easier for people to edit Vector Art. In the study/survey posted above, I have implemented two algorithms that try to define what "perceptually-guided" might mean. I want to know which of the two is better and collect data on how people use this tool. To achieve this for each session, I randomly pick an algorithm and use it to drive inference when the tool is being used. I'm aware that neither of the two algorithms are close to perfect but want to know whether this line of work is relevant for creators of Vector Art.