Perspectives sur l’IA pour les responsables des politiques
Co-dirigé par Mila et le CIFAR, ce programme met en relation les décideur·euse·s avec des chercheur·euse·s de pointe en IA grâce à une combinaison de consultations ouvertes et d'exercices de test de faisabilité des politiques. La prochaine session aura lieu les 9 et 10 octobre.
Hugo Larochelle nommé directeur scientifique de Mila
Professeur associé à l’Université de Montréal et ancien responsable du laboratoire de recherche en IA de Google à Montréal, Hugo Larochelle est un pionnier de l’apprentissage profond et fait partie des chercheur·euses les plus respecté·es au Canada.
Mila organise son premier hackathon en informatique quantique le 21 novembre. Une journée unique pour explorer le prototypage quantique et l’IA, collaborer sur les plateformes de Quandela et IBM, et apprendre, échanger et réseauter dans un environnement stimulant au cœur de l’écosystème québécois en IA et en quantique.
Une nouvelle initiative pour renforcer les liens entre la communauté de recherche, les partenaires et les expert·e·s en IA à travers le Québec et le Canada, grâce à des rencontres et événements en présentiel axés sur l’adoption de l’IA dans l’industrie.
Nous utilisons des témoins pour analyser le trafic et l’utilisation de notre site web, afin de personnaliser votre expérience. Vous pouvez désactiver ces technologies à tout moment, mais cela peut restreindre certaines fonctionnalités du site. Consultez notre Politique de protection de la vie privée pour en savoir plus.
Paramètre des cookies
Vous pouvez activer et désactiver les types de cookies que vous souhaitez accepter. Cependant certains choix que vous ferez pourraient affecter les services proposés sur nos sites (ex : suggestions, annonces personnalisées, etc.).
Cookies essentiels
Ces cookies sont nécessaires au fonctionnement du site et ne peuvent être désactivés. (Toujours actif)
Cookies analyse
Acceptez-vous l'utilisation de cookies pour mesurer l'audience de nos sites ?
Multimedia Player
Acceptez-vous l'utilisation de cookies pour afficher et vous permettre de regarder les contenus vidéo hébergés par nos partenaires (YouTube, etc.) ?
Neural network training is inherently sensitive to initialization and the randomness induced by stochastic gradient descent. However, it is … (voir plus)unclear to what extent such effects lead to meaningfully different networks, either in terms of the models' weights or the underlying functions that were learned. In this work, we show that during the initial "chaotic" phase of training, even extremely small perturbations reliably causes otherwise identical training trajectories to diverge-an effect that diminishes rapidly over training time. We quantify this divergence through (i)
Neural network training begins with a chaotic phase in which the network is sensitive to small perturbations, such as those caused by stocha… (voir plus)stic gradient descent (SGD). This sensitivity can cause identically initialized networks to diverge both in parameter space and functional similarity.
However, the exact degree to which networks are sensitive to perturbation, and the sensitivity of networks as they transition out of the chaotic phase, is unclear.
To address this uncertainty, we apply a controlled perturbation at a single point in training time and measure its effect on otherwise identical training trajectories.
We find that both the
Motivated by the goals of dataset pruning and defect identification, a growing body of methods have been developed to score individual examp… (voir plus)les within a dataset. These methods, which we call"example difficulty scores", are typically used to rank or categorize examples, but the consistency of rankings between different training runs, scoring methods, and model architectures is generally unknown. To determine how example rankings vary due to these random and controlled effects, we systematically compare different formulations of scores over a range of runs and model architectures. We find that scores largely share the following traits: they are noisy over individual runs of a model, strongly correlated with a single notion of difficulty, and reveal examples that range from being highly sensitive to insensitive to the inductive biases of certain model architectures. Drawing from statistical genetics, we develop a simple method for fingerprinting model architectures using a few sensitive examples. These findings guide practitioners in maximizing the consistency of their scores (e.g. by choosing appropriate scoring methods, number of runs, and subsets of examples), and establishes comprehensive baselines for evaluating scores in the future.
Motivated by the goals of dataset pruning and defect identification, a growing body of methods have been developed to score individual examp… (voir plus)les within a dataset. These methods, which we call"example difficulty scores", are typically used to rank or categorize examples, but the consistency of rankings between different training runs, scoring methods, and model architectures is generally unknown. To determine how example rankings vary due to these random and controlled effects, we systematically compare different formulations of scores over a range of runs and model architectures. We find that scores largely share the following traits: they are noisy over individual runs of a model, strongly correlated with a single notion of difficulty, and reveal examples that range from being highly sensitive to insensitive to the inductive biases of certain model architectures. Drawing from statistical genetics, we develop a simple method for fingerprinting model architectures using a few sensitive examples. These findings guide practitioners in maximizing the consistency of their scores (e.g. by choosing appropriate scoring methods, number of runs, and subsets of examples), and establishes comprehensive baselines for evaluating scores in the future.