วีดีโอ

confusing there must be a simpler derivation

thanks

I’m here because of Lord Jamar. His interview on the Godfrey Comedy channel was very interesting….

Williams John Young Gary Clark Jessica

Очень классные ролики, очень интересно и понятно смотреть Только переводить не легко бывает, привет из России ❤

You're the best explanation out there in my opinion. I appreciate you!!

Why wouldn’t going against the aether be the opposite of going with it. They should cancel out.

predicted Ci is calculated with IoU if the cell have object, then how to calculate predicted Ci if the cell doesnt have object?

Ortiz Mountains

Beautiful video. Thank you

Your error is at th-cam.com/video/FvqutkaPmas/w-d-xo.html If the spherical wave is centred and expanding from K origin, it cant also be expanding from a different center at location K prime's origin which is also in motion. Your whole explanation has failed at this point.

Thank you so much for this, really cleared up how VAEs work

Thank you so much for these videos

the is all BS. For jack, his ladder doesn't shrink, because he can say the barn is doing the moving, so the barn is not as big as it was before. So the ladder certainly cant fit. Now that we know it doesn't fit for two reasons, its not going to fit if you invent a third option. Your error is in your stupid simultaneity example. make up your mind, it cant be two things that light does. The centre of an expanding sphere of light cant have two different origins, one not moving and the other moving. That is where you make the error of simple logic and simple physics.

Martin Jessica Moore Carol Taylor Dorothy

this is amazing 🤩

By far the best resource I've found on VAEs, after _lots_ of reading and video watching. This puts it all together intelligently and clearly. Thank you!!

Wow wonderful explanation ❤️ ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

There is a difference between a paradox and BS. This is BS ........ not a paradox.

I think the Aether does exist

confusing

Zero point energy (bare vacuum) needs to be included in this.

As a junior AI developer, this was the best toturial of Adam and Other optimizers I've ever seen. Simply explained but not too simply to be a useless overview Thanks

This video is amazing! I like how you get "reparametrization trick" into the picture, that you first calculate the gradient seperately to show the potential issue. Super clear!

Earth does not move!

Great Explaination! Thank you.

awesome explanation, contains a lot of information which are missing in the paper. Thank you

Yeah, I don’t know about that.

Very interesting indeed, I feel kinda stupid cuz I barely understand the math tho lol.

Finally thats the counterargument that came to my mind

Note on 16:38. The classifier doesn't directly classify the ground-truth factor corresponding to each latent variable; it classifies the factor that was kept constant in each input data pair. However, the structure of the problem, and the limitation of a linear classifier, ensures that it can only do this by mapping latent variables to ground-truth factors.

why don't i see such detailed explanation videos as PDFs? do you guys think you'll get rich from a couple hundred views on youtube??? make a PDF (including ALL your explanations during the video!). having only an online version, plus having to click stop and juggle with the video position slider and never having a continuous presentation in front of my eyes is just plain nonsense for this kind of material. basically, it seems (from what i've been able to follow) to be a very well done presentation in terms of content , but totally useless in the form the content is delivered PS: never heard this so clearly stated before: "a VAE maps a point in X to a distribution in Z by pushing the distributions towards the prior of Z which is a unit guasian, which encourages the distributions to overlap and fill all the space of the prior of Z". just brilliant.

The sheer arrogance of Michelson and Morley in ignoring the obvious fact that gravity is ether flow totally bewilders me to this day.

Good work man its the best explanation i have ever seen. Thank you so much for your work.

Thanks a lot. Really clear one.

Best video on VAEs I found on TH-cam :D Thanks a lot!

It is a paradox, because it has a solution. Without a solution, it is just a contradiction.

Great explanation. Thank you. Are you familiar with any algorithms for solving the following task: lets say we have an empty battery with infinite capacity that is beeing charged at W Watts/Hour, and B number of buttons, each button uses X amount of stored energy, but increases the charging rate by Y Watts/Hour. Each button can be pressed only once. We need to fin the sequence that will allow us reach maximum charging rate (aka press all the buttons) in the shortest time.

exzellent Stuff, who needs netflix with this ;-)

This video was a masterpiece

Excellent explanation. You kept this video short and sweet while also being informative. I wish more videos were like this.

NOTES: - Slight typo at 15:20. Where it says "ELBO" within the integral, it's just the difference of logs, whereas the ELBO is actually the expectation of difference of logs over q(z|x). - At 20:36 (the Gaussian case), I've phrased it in univariate terms (even though the Gaussian is generally multivariate); however, we would still recover the result that what we're calculating is a Euclidean distance between x and mu, given that our covariance matrix is an identity matrix.

You put everything together working in the video, that's really helpful. Thank you!

Why the light travel forward and backward distance are the same? it is not the same.

Hello, I can't understand the step of instant 15:20. You expand the expectation, you bring the gradient int the integral, but, why do you substitute the difference of logs by the ELBO?? The ELBO is the expectation of the difference of logs over q, isn't it?

Thank you very much for your work, it has been decisive for me to understand the basis of this type of models and it will surely be of great help for me to understand the functioning of others.

at 8:07 why would the scale factor be different for light going in the opposite direction?

I just came off of about three hours of lectures on VAEs in the Stanford "Deep Generative Models" course, and they didn't do as good of an explanation as you did here 🤷‍♂

Please, comment! My problem with this experiment, as well as with the "Hafele and Keating experiment", is that it was conducted in and affected by the Earth's gravitational field. Is there an experiment that was (or is being conducted) in space, as far away from the Sun and/or any planet's gravitational field? Thanks

My favorite video on VAEs, the derivation of the ELBO is much clearer than in other resources I've found online. Awesome resource.