<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Neighborhood Attention Transformer · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2204.07143/</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/2204.07143/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Neighborhood Attention Transformer — mentioned by godelski</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35506691</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2204.07143:35506691</guid><pubDate>Sun, 09 Apr 2023 21:32:46 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;It is also important to remember that there are different inductive biases for different networks. Sutton&amp;#x27;s &amp;quot;Bitter Lesson&amp;quot;[0] argues for scale + more arbitrary complexity. ViTs scale really well because some of this arbitrary complexity. But I agree with your point that what to use is not obvious and this gets really complicated real quickly. For example, Swin loses some of the properties of self-attention but Neighborhood Attention doesn&amp;#x27;t[1] (these are both considered reductive attention types). Does this have a large effect? Might depend on your task. Looking at non-classification tasks…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2204.07143/"&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>
