Live data from Hacker News

Natural Language Basics with TextBlob

rwet.decontextualize.com

21–24 of 24 posts

Re: Natural Language Basics with TextBlob

#21
post #14
post #8

I think NLP is really cool, but it seems to be moving so quickly. If I wanted to get a decent overview, are there some review papers or textbooks with good coverage that aren't too out of date?

Just learn Deep Learning instead. I'm a NLP person, and I think the Wit.ai people said it best: Many papers were kind of “the state of the art for X was Y. We replaced the hand-crafted, manually hacked, heavily engineered Z by a RNN. It improved state of the art by 5 points.” The poor guys who presented deep learning-free papers invariably got the question: “did you also try with a [insert deep net technique here]?”…

Wouldn't this require larger datasets? That isn't always an option. I'm imagining that a smaller, more computationally efficient network could learn nearly as well with fewer data points given these heavily engineered features. Is that off base?

Re: Natural Language Basics with TextBlob

#22
post #21
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just learn Deep Learning instead. I'm a NLP person, and I think the Wit.ai people said it best: Many papers were kind of “the state of the art for X was Y. We replaced the hand-crafted, manually hacked, heavily engineered Z by a RNN. It improved state of the art by 5 points.” The poor guys who presented deep learning-free papers invariably got the question: “did you also try with a [insert deep net technique here]?”…

Wouldn't this require larger datasets? That isn't always an option. I'm imagining that a smaller, more computationally efficient network could learn nearly as well with fewer data points given these heavily engineered features. Is that off base?

Basically, no. See http://karpathy.github.io/2015/05/21/rnn-effectiveness/

He gets pretty amazing results with a corpus size around 10M.

Re: Natural Language Basics with TextBlob

#23
post #22
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't this require larger datasets? That isn't always an option. I'm imagining that a smaller, more computationally efficient network could learn nearly as well with fewer data points given these heavily engineered features. Is that off base?

Basically, no. See http://karpathy.github.io/2015/05/21/rnn-effectiveness/ He gets pretty amazing results with a corpus size around 10M.

But that takes ages to train!

Re: Natural Language Basics with TextBlob

#24
post #23
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basically, no. See http://karpathy.github.io/2015/05/21/rnn-effectiveness/ He gets pretty amazing results with a corpus size around 10M.

But that takes ages to train!

So something like Jason Weston's state-of-the-art attention-NN based sentence summarizer took ~4 days to train.

You'd easily spend that time doing manual feature engineering just to build a baseline system.

Post reply on HN