<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Minimum Probability Flow Learning · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/0906.4779/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/0906.4779/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Minimum Probability Flow Learning — mentioned by andbberger</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9817151</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:0906.4779:9817151</guid><pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2015 06:15:56 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Virtually everyone uses gradient based methods in the end to fine tune the weights. Yes, there are other methods. Contrastive divergence seems to be king right now - of note is Minimum probability flow learning [1] (of which CD is a special case of). However the flavor of these methods tends to be tuning the weights of the model in such a way to maximize how close the model comes to sharing the probability distribution of the data. One can generally not constraint the model parameters (ie by freezing a layer) and retain the models ability to &amp;#x27;learn&amp;#x27; the data distribution.…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/0906.4779/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.LG</category></item></channel></rss>
