Hilarious! I have picked my favorite text from the article.
https://youtu.be/r6H14MIJRk4
A Kaggle Grandmaster cheated in $25k AI contest with hidden code
91–100 of 197 posts
Re: A Kaggle Grandmaster cheated in $25k AI contest with hidden code
#92I'm not going to defend Pleskov but organizers shouldn't have put out the competition with money attached that can simply be solved by scraping data. Good ML competition in fact should even invite cheats because the end goal is not ML for the sake of ML but rather cracking the prediction problem by whatever shortest path possible.
I would have a different interpretation. If he cheated once, he has most likely done it before and since the competition in question. Usually when 'good people' cheat there is a series of escalating transgressions before they get caught.
Re: A Kaggle Grandmaster cheated in $25k AI contest with hidden code
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Winning" by anything that can reasonably called cheating, as in this case, does not advance the general state of the art. Innovation is best served through appropriate rules and competition structure.
Yes, and that's the right thing to do in the academic research setting ("advance the state of the art"). But the public competitions with monetary rewards are not the same setting. I can imagine scenarios where the guy stole the test set from Kaggle servers (i.e. unlawful access) should disqualify him permanently. But the essence of the competition should be the focus on cracking a given problem, not about a specific…
[deleted]
Re: A Kaggle Grandmaster cheated in $25k AI contest with hidden code
#94I remember reading about this on Twitter because of a reply from h2o.ai account. https://twitter.com/ppleskov/status/1215983188876709888?s=19 The person was originally employed at h2o.ai and as a consequence of this was fired. Not sure if that was completely appropriate. Wasn't this a personal participation? Or are there "company teams" on Kaggle ?
This is a perfectly valid reason to fire someone, even in Europe.
If you admitted to cheating on your degree, and your university found out and revoked your degree, then you'd probably expect to get fired from your job if you no longer have the qualification you said you did. Being a top 10 kagglester is a qualification (and a highly prestigious one at that).
Re: A Kaggle Grandmaster cheated in $25k AI contest with hidden code
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
They train winning code from scratch, I think, so you wouldn't have been able to just train the model with the "unseen" data.
They scraped data from the website of the org that wanted the results and funded the competition. That data was supposed to be unseen for the competitors and used to grade the models. This cheat was to use that scraped data in its training set and, beyond that, hard code some predictions. It's looking up the answers in the grading sheet while taking an exam.
Your parent is saying kaggle takes the training code and runs it themselves. This makss secretly training on the known right answers impossible.
Re: A Kaggle Grandmaster cheated in $25k AI contest with hidden code
#96I'm not going to defend Pleskov but organizers shouldn't have put out the competition with money attached that can simply be solved by scraping data. Good ML competition in fact should even invite cheats because the end goal is not ML for the sake of ML but rather cracking the prediction problem by whatever shortest path possible.
I would have a different interpretation. If he cheated once, he has most likely done it before and since the competition in question. Usually when 'good people' cheat there is a series of escalating transgressions before they get caught.
He in fact did cheat previously with a similar technique: https://www.kaggle.com/c/quora-insincere-questions-classific...
Re: A Kaggle Grandmaster cheated in $25k AI contest with hidden code
#97Never understood Kaggle. The Netflix Prize was great. Now it’s just people gaming Kaggle to get a job.
One of the Kaggle competitions was used as an assignment for the Statistics course at my university. IIRC it was really fiddly.
Re: A Kaggle Grandmaster cheated in $25k AI contest with hidden code
#98I'm not going to defend Pleskov but organizers shouldn't have put out the competition with money attached that can simply be solved by scraping data. Good ML competition in fact should even invite cheats because the end goal is not ML for the sake of ML but rather cracking the prediction problem by whatever shortest path possible.
"Winning" by anything that can reasonably called cheating, as in this case, does not advance the general state of the art. Innovation is best served through appropriate rules and competition structure.
I disagree... The hope with competitions is that we learn something new through massive semi collaborative exploration. Raising the barrier to hosting useful competitions means we learn less.
Re: A Kaggle Grandmaster cheated in $25k AI contest with hidden code
#99> The goal was to create an algorithm that could predict how quickly a pet would be adopted based on its profile details, from its photo to its breed, sex, size, age, and whether it had been vaccinated or not. > These predictions would be used to optimize and tweak future critters' profiles so that they are adopted as soon as possible. Sorry but, how is this useful? You can't just change the age of an animal to make…
I have my doubts too, since there are quite likely ceiling effects. Perhaps the competition was set up out of desperation, or because the non-profit still had 25k to burn who knows?
But I would be really interested to see if it really has an effect, and if that effect can be sustained.
Re: A Kaggle Grandmaster cheated in $25k AI contest with hidden code
#100Am I missing something? It seems like "adoption speed" really isn't something you want to over optimize. The whole point is to match abandoned animals with suitable homes. Adoption speed seems secondary to post adoption measures of adopter satisfaction and adoptee welfare.
It's a classic optimization problem. With high speed, but poor suitability, animals are bound to return. With low speed, but good suitability, there's low return rate - but slow turnover, which leads to overcrowding and rejection of new animals.
Like in business and tech, you want a high as posible throughput / inventory turnover rate - but obviously with constraints.