<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Data Scaling Laws in NMT: The Effect of Noise and Architecture · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2202.01994/</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/2202.01994/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Data Scaling Laws in NMT: The Effect of Noise and Architecture — mentioned by momenti</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30766959</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2202.01994:30766959</guid><pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2022 15:07:07 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;That&amp;#x27;s not entirely true. Neural networks are fairly robust to noisy training data (a.k.a. garbage).[0] Well, stochastic gradient descent has the noise in its name. More training data can compensate for noisy data to some extent.[1] I&amp;#x27;m not sure know if model size can also compensate for noisy data though, but would not be surprised if it did. [0] https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.10694 [1] https://arxiv.org/abs/2202.01994&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2202.01994/"&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>
