<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Towards End-to-End In-Image Neural Machine Translation · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2010.10648/</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/2010.10648/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Towards End-to-End In-Image Neural Machine Translation — mentioned by gwern</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35071391</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2010.10648:35071391</guid><pubDate>Wed, 08 Mar 2023 16:52:19 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; LLMs do not do this, and if you&amp;#x27;re training the LLMs (at cost) to do this, you&amp;#x27;re already having to do the very same searching out of materials within the corpus related to what you want. A more reasonable suggestion would be not training a LLM (which one doesn&amp;#x27;t want to do anyway) but treating it as a retrieval+summarization task: search the corpus for mentions and similar-by-embedding documents, and summarize. LLMs are good at abstractive summarization with minimal hallucination or error. This can serve as an &amp;#x27;annotated bibliography&amp;#x27;, a first pass for a human writing it themselves, or the…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2010.10648/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.CL</category></item></channel></rss>
