|
| ▲ | goosedragons 3 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| That's true! But it's also true that any program dealing with floats can run into numerical instability if care isn't taken to avoid it, no? It's also not necessarily immediately obvious that the derivatives ARE wrong if the implementation is wrong. |
| |
| ▲ | srean 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | | > It's also not necessarily immediately obvious that the derivatives ARE wrong if the implementation is wrong. It's neither full proof or fool proof but an absolute must is a check that the loss function is reducing. It quickly detects a common error that the sign came out wrong in my gradient call. Part of good practice one learns in grad school. | |
| ▲ | froobius 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | You can pretty concretely and easily check that the AD primatives are correct by comparing them to numerical differentiation. |
|
|
| ▲ | godelski 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I haven't watched the video but the text says they're getting like 60+% error on simple linear ODEs which is pretty problematic. You're right, but the scale of the problem seems to be the issue |
