<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Learning in an Uncertain World: Representing Ambiguity Through Multiple Hypotheses · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1612.00197/</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/1612.00197/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Learning in an Uncertain World: Representing Ambiguity Through Multiple Hypotheses — mentioned by ollin</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49136548</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1612.00197:49136548</guid><pubDate>Sat, 01 Aug 2026 17:37:03 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;This paper shows a nice integration of older winner-take-all ideas for learning K-modal generative models (see e.g. https://arxiv.org/abs/1612.00197, https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.14286) into modern diffusion/flow pipelines. As-implemented, I think it has some downsides: 1. K-1 extra forward passes during training 2. Inaccurate sampling behavior (will sample all K modes with equal likelihood, rather than sampling them proportionally) However, I think both of these downsides can be mitigated by adjusting the implementation a bit more (you can have the model predict K modes jointly in one forward…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1612.00197/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.CV</category></item></channel></rss>
