Live data from Hacker News

High-res image reconstruction with latent diffusion models from human brain

github.com

81–90 of 170 posts

Re: High-res image reconstruction with latent diffusion models from human brain

#81

I immediately found the results suspect, and think I have found what is actually going on. The dataset it was trained on was 2770 images, minus 982 of those used for validation. I posit that the system did not actually read any pictures from the brains, but simply overfitted all the training images into the network itself. For example, if one looks at a picture of a teddy bear, you'd get an overfitted picture of anot…

What are you talking about? They didn't train a model for this. That's why it's so impressive.

Quoting from the paper,

  The only training required in our method is to con-
  struct linear models that map fMRI signals to each LDM
  component, and no training or fine-tuning of deep-learning
  models is needed.
  
  ...
  
  To construct models from fMRI to the components of
  LDM, we used L2-regularized linear regression, and all
  models were built on a per subject basis. Weights were
  estimated from training data, and regularization parame-
  ters were explored during the training using 5-fold cross-
  validation.

Re: High-res image reconstruction with latent diffusion models from human brain

#82
post #49
post #29

As people and groups increasingly move this direction do we think about vectors for abuse in 10, 20 or 50+ years? The human mind is considered the only place where we have true privacy. All these efforts are taking that away. At this rate all notions of privacy will soon be dead.

If this technology becomes accessible to courtrooms or police, they will use it. There will never be a way to encrypt thoughts.

Prediction: aphantasics will be in high demand for certain roles and activities

Re: High-res image reconstruction with latent diffusion models from human brain

#83
post #29

As people and groups increasingly move this direction do we think about vectors for abuse in 10, 20 or 50+ years? The human mind is considered the only place where we have true privacy. All these efforts are taking that away. At this rate all notions of privacy will soon be dead.

> As people and groups increasingly move this direction do we think about vectors for abuse in 10, 20 or 50+ years? No, the delusional shortsighted and revenue-driven SV startup culture doesn't give a shit about such 'technophobic trivialities'.

Yu Takagi, Shinji Nishimoto

Graduate School of Frontier Biosciences, Osaka University, Japan

Re: High-res image reconstruction with latent diffusion models from human brain

#84
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like you might be moving the goal posts here a bit. Getting a reconstruction that is a bear, even if not the same bear, is impressive enough to be noteworthy.

I think the point is that it's not a reconstruction. It's more like recognizing which letter of a thousand-letter alphabet is shown to the human after decoding their brain waves. Still impressive, but not really as impressive as visual reconstruction.

TBH, I was not impressed up until now, but given the videos I have in mind from people trying to use brain computing interfaces to type a text, now I'm impressed.

Re: High-res image reconstruction with latent diffusion models from human brain

#85
post #29

As people and groups increasingly move this direction do we think about vectors for abuse in 10, 20 or 50+ years? The human mind is considered the only place where we have true privacy. All these efforts are taking that away. At this rate all notions of privacy will soon be dead.

Have you seen the size and cost of an fMRI machine?

We are a long way away from worrying about this.

Cheap cameras everywhere on the other hand...

Re: High-res image reconstruction with latent diffusion models from human brain

#88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The end game here is developing a mind reading device. The endeavor device is ethically questionable because such a device would have a lot of ethically wrong/questionable applications.

You're begging the question.

No they're not.

They're not saying "X is bad because X is bad", which would be begging the question.

They're saying X is bad because it leads to Y, and Y is bad. Y being bad is supposed to be common knowledge, so they didn't go into detail.

Re: High-res image reconstruction with latent diffusion models from human brain

#89
post #28

I immediately found the results suspect, and think I have found what is actually going on. The dataset it was trained on was 2770 images, minus 982 of those used for validation. I posit that the system did not actually read any pictures from the brains, but simply overfitted all the training images into the network itself. For example, if one looks at a picture of a teddy bear, you'd get an overfitted picture of anot…

I'm definitely not an expert in this subject, but even if the model is overfitted, doesn't the fact that it can pull out the similar images at all give credit to the idea that a larger, non-overfitted model could actually work as the paper describes? It means that there does exist some correlation between the shown subject, the captured fMRI data, and the resulting location in latent space.

Yes.

It means there may be signal in the noise. Even if it's overfitting. Which makes sense.

A sufficiently granular map of the human brain aught to be readable, if you know what the input and output signals are.

Re: High-res image reconstruction with latent diffusion models from human brain

#90
There was this research where they reconstructed human face images from monkey brain scan. https://www.electronicproducts.com/scientists-reconstruct-im...

What's astonishing here is the quality of reconstruction. But I have not seen this research referenced a lot. Does someone how /why the reconstruction from monkey brain looks so perfect while we don't have anything close from human brain?

Edit: better images here https://www.newscientist.com/article/2133343-photos-of-human...

Post reply on HN