<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1409.0575/</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/1409.0575/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge — mentioned by daveguy</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12012767</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1409.0575:12012767</guid><pubDate>Thu, 30 Jun 2016 23:43:08 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;I think the likely answer is Tesla &amp;quot;autopilot&amp;quot; is a glorified cruise control + lane assist + data collection for future intelligent controls. Google probably has close to this capability, but they are at the leading edge of image recognition. In order to depend on it the AI would have to be able to distinguish 99.9+% and would have to be able to tell the difference between a green truck and a road sign. I honestly think self driving cars will require intelligence indistinguishable from artificial general intelligence. This was state of the art in 2014 (improved in 2015, but this paper is on…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1409.0575/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.CV</category></item><item><title>ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge — mentioned by phaemon</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9536430</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1409.0575:9536430</guid><pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2015 02:39:29 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;I read over it, but there are a couple of problems with that. Firstly, I never said that computers understand the images, just that the recognition is better than human. When they get it wrong, they do tend to get it wrong in ways that look ludicrous to people. Secondly, Stanford didn&amp;#x27;t win the 2014 ImageNet challenge: GoogLeNet did. However, I was still wrong. Have a look at the summary paper from ImageNet: http://arxiv.org/abs/1409.0575 Page 31 states: &amp;quot;Annotator A1 evaluated a total of 1500 test set images. The GoogLeNet classification error on this sample was estimated to be 6.8% (recall…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1409.0575/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.CV</category></item><item><title>ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge — HN submission</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8479720</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:submission:1409.0575:8479720</guid><pubDate>Sun, 19 Oct 2014 21:34:37 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;10 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. &lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1409.0575/"&gt;Paper and source history&lt;/a&gt;. A submission is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.CV</category></item></channel></rss>
