<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Invariant Information Clustering for Unsupervised Image Classification and Segmentation · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1807.06653/</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/1807.06653/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Invariant Information Clustering for Unsupervised Image Classification and Segmentation — mentioned by fxtentacle</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22223033</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1807.06653:22223033</guid><pubDate>Mon, 03 Feb 2020 10:45:41 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;The problem that I see with supervised training of a linear classifier after unsupervised training is that if the unsupervised network is large enough, it allows the supervised trainer to choose the working components. As shown in [1] that can lead to randomly initialized networks working well, too, meaning that this does not necessarily show that the unsupervised training produced useful features. I would instead suggest to train a categorization classifier unsupervised, too, for example using mutual information loss with the correct number of categories, as suggested in [2]. Afterwards, one…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1807.06653/"&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>
