This actually seems like a great program for automatically generating adversarial examples to improve OCR. A human could rate this text as being illegible or legible. Each example can then be added to the training data to improve its quality.
Reverse OCR
71–80 of 92 posts
Re: Reverse OCR
#72I can't believe OCR has not been solved yet.
The only one even close is OmniPage.
Re: Reverse OCR
#73I was thinking about this: http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~graves/handwriting.html
that is so impressive, wow. thank you for the link
Re: Reverse OCR
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
I did this recently, the results were surprisingly good! https://github.com/darkFunction/PolygonPainter Edit: Roger Alsing's implementation was a single entity population (mutated then reverted if the mutation was no good). I copied this approach in my first implementation, but found that much better results could be achieved with a breeding population of genes.
Yeah really good results, conceivably useful for compression. It be good to know the vertices count in your final penguin images.
100, 6-sided polygons :) Though it looks pretty good with as few as 50
Re: Reverse OCR
#75Looks like he has written tons of very creative bots. They are all very interesting ideas (e.g. http://randomshopper.tumblr.com )
Re: Reverse OCR
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not much, probably. It would be largely wasted effort to tune OCR algorithms to avoid (falsely) recognizing letters in artificially synthetized datasets that don't occur in practice.
Why's it so highly upvoted then? I was expecting something moderately legible.
> I was expecting something moderately legible.
Is human handwriting anything more then repeated patterns with lines and shapes on a 2d plane?
A computer program designed by humans to assist with human constructs can infer meaning from what appears to be mostly noise to humans. It hits us hard because communication through complex language is the defining trait of our species. It manages to do what we do, and many people are intrigued by the results.
Are we just observing the results of our actions or did we just take one more small step towards the singularity?
Re: Reverse OCR
#77I was thinking about this: http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~graves/handwriting.html
Very impressive!
The author published an open source library -- RNNLIB [1] used for his neural network research but is the actual code for this hand writing demo published somewhere?
Re: Reverse OCR
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
http://ssbkyh.com/works/fadtcha/
Nice, a captcha to block colorblind users!
That's a subset of the objective. The objective is to detect all humans because they wouldn't spot the 'face' in the coloured circles. Whether or not it's coloured doesn't change that.
Unless you're concerned about the rights of colour-blind computers for some reason.
Re: Reverse OCR
#79Perhaps this could lead to a new kind of captcha that only bots can solve. I doubt it would be efficient, though.
http://ssbkyh.com/works/fadtcha/
How do you know if the individual being tested doesn't see a face? You have to trust them when they say "no face here"... May as well just ask "are you human?"
Re: Reverse OCR
#80This actually seems like a great program for automatically generating adversarial examples to improve OCR. A human could rate this text as being illegible or legible. Each example can then be added to the training data to improve its quality.
The Letter Spirit project (a Douglas Hofstadter thing) is sort of in that vein, but less prosaic in its objectives.