[HN Gopher] Thinking Like Transformers
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Thinking Like Transformers
        
       Author : ArtWomb
       Score  : 140 points
       Date   : 2021-06-16 12:59 UTC (10 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (arxiv.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (arxiv.org)
        
       | baxinho0312 wrote:
       | As someone working in EE on power transformers, I am deeply
       | disappointed that this article is about neural networks....
        
         | gk1 wrote:
         | Dang, please consider saying something in the guidelines about
         | these kinds of comments?
        
           | munificent wrote:
           | I found I started enjoying social media a lot more when I
           | changed my mindset from:
           | 
           |  _This topic isn 't relevant to me thus it shouldn't be
           | here._
           | 
           | to:
           | 
           |  _This topic isn 't relevant to me thus I'll simply ignore
           | it._
           | 
           | I would rather participate in communities that are semi-
           | filtered and rely on me providing a second filter for my own
           | taste. If instead the community tries to filter down entirely
           | to my taste, I find it ends up overfitting and I lose almost
           | all of the serendipitious "I didn't know I was interested in
           | this but wow." articles that I love.
           | 
           | In other words, stuff I don't care about isn't a bug, it's a
           | feature--a side effect of allowing a greater variety of
           | content some of which is interesting but which can't be
           | predicted.
        
             | kevinskii wrote:
             | Sure, some HN comments and their ensuing discussions may be
             | completely unrelated to the posted topic. I've learned a
             | lot from these over the years, and I'm happy to ignore the
             | ones that I don't care about.
             | 
             | But just as there is now a guideline against making
             | irrelevant and unsolicited nitpicky website design
             | complaints, it would be useful to have a guideline against
             | "I thought the article would be about X" types of comments
             | as well. These are similarly pervasive, and of similarly
             | low value. It might be different if they started a
             | discussion about X (power transformers in this case), but
             | they almost never do.
        
             | mjburgess wrote:
             | This is a very important point.
             | 
             | The issue with social media is it is essentially
             | unsolicited. With TV, you tune to "The Discovery Channel",
             | and if you dont like it, you tune to another.
             | 
             | With social media you are invited to react to things as-if
             | they were for _you_. This is the origin of, i 'd say, 90%
             | of the _instigating_ none-sense that causes trouble.
             | 
             | Social media arguments are often just between not-the-
             | audience and the-audience talking past each other. With the
             | former basically saying, "i dont understand this, and its
             | wasting my time"; and the latter saying, "i understand this
             | and its really important".
        
           | bee_rider wrote:
           | There's nothing wrong with somebody expressing confusion over
           | the overly jargony title.
        
           | baxinho0312 wrote:
           | I just think that the term transformer is overloaded with
           | several meanings - electrical transformer, the cartoon, a
           | transfer function in a NLP neural network and I have heard it
           | used in ETL applications for the transform function. Not
           | fields that are closely related, but still it might result in
           | semantic confusion nonetheless. Similarly term translation
           | has a completely different meaning in mathematics than in
           | linguistics, e.g.
        
           | teekert wrote:
           | You must be the life of the party.
        
           | mchusma wrote:
           | As a counterpoint, I prefer a world where comments are not
           | overly policed. I believe it stifles creativity, and I think
           | comments like yours harm not help the community by making
           | people less comfortable sharing.
        
             | failwhaleshark wrote:
             | Exactly. The culture of "no" and control-freaks trying to
             | shackle others into thinking down a linear path. This often
             | leads to ideological homogeneity and pushes a large
             | fraction of people away, amplifying homogeneity.
             | 
             | Instead of downvoting or flagging for merely disinterest or
             | disagreement, perhaps there should be some sort of helpful
             | "hide button" in the form of a plus-to-minus sign next to
             | "parent"?
        
               | meowkit wrote:
               | But then how will I attempt to gain feelings of control,
               | and thus perceived power, during my life in the salient
               | face of my inevitable mortal demise?
               | 
               | /s
               | 
               | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terror_management_theory
        
               | failwhaleshark wrote:
               | Isn't that why most people become police officers and
               | other authority figures? You'll just have to torture
               | living things, wet the bed, and set fires like the rest
               | of us. /s /s /s /s /s
               | 
               | Don't forget moral panicking, outrage crybullying, serial
               | scapegoats crucifixion, taking-out aggression,
               | bikeshedding, and cyberdisinhibitionism are also part of
               | this complete breakfast.
        
             | belval wrote:
             | While I generally agree with your stance on over-policing,
             | a third of the comments under this article are off-topic.
             | HN is unique in that the community somewhat agrees that
             | discussion should be on-topic and has a lot less tolerance
             | for single-line jokes or sarcasm.
             | 
             | > I think comments like yours harm not help the community
             | by making people less comfortable sharing.
             | 
             | Maybe I am unique in that, but if your contribution to a
             | thread on a deep learning paper is a joke about decepticons
             | or electrical transformers, it's okay to be less
             | comfortable about sharing.
        
               | bee_rider wrote:
               | I interpret these puns as lighthearted feedback to the
               | point that the title is unclear and jargony. Apparently a
               | transformer is some machine learning thing, I'm sure it
               | is an appropriate name for a journal publication where
               | everybody who sees it will be in the field, but to an
               | outsider it is not really obvious what this title is
               | about.
        
               | kortex wrote:
               | I'd be fine with a joke which somehow manages to pun NN
               | transformers, electrical transformers, and the series
               | about robots. _That_ would be an interesting and
               | sufficiently novel joke. It 's high surprisal.
               | 
               | I have no problem policing the low-effort, un-novel,
               | unsurprising, lame quips about expecting _other use of
               | the word transformer_. It adds nothing of value and
               | dilutes threads. I 've gotten downvoted for doing it,
               | most of us have, it's a right of passage, and one that I
               | appreciate, since it makes HN comment threads jam-packed
               | with interesting info.
        
           | failwhaleshark wrote:
           | _Story titles often are more than meets the eye._ - Lord Dang
           | (Decepticon)
        
       | neogodless wrote:
       | To go a bit meta, I think this link contributes to Hacker News
       | because it sparks curiosity. While I was among those wondering if
       | this would look into some kind of computational model that did
       | what Transformers do (at least in the modern movies), scan an
       | object in order to reconstruct it / reconfigure itself into that
       | object, I quickly realized this is about something else. But it
       | is something interesting and worth learning more about[0]. So
       | just get over your prime instinct to be disappointed that the
       | subject doesn't match your expectations, and change your attitude
       | towards information shared that feels alien.
       | 
       | [0]
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformer_(machine_learning_...
        
       | failwhaleshark wrote:
       | First, you have to make the shape-changing noises with your mouth
       | while you turn into a Ford Focus.
       | 
       | Then, you find some Energon.
       | 
       | Next, red lasers.
        
       | xiphias2 wrote:
       | I love this paper, I always had an issue of visualizing
       | transformers from reading ML papers, with this I can just play
       | with it. These are simple higher-order functions that can be
       | implemented in any language though, so porting to Python and
       | playing with it in a Jupyter notebook is trivial.
        
         | anentropic wrote:
         | I'm not sure if it's from the authors of the paper, but this
         | appears to be that: https://github.com/tech-srl/RASP
        
           | polynomial wrote:
           | The paper's lead author is the sole committer on that repo.
        
       | G3rn0ti wrote:
       | Oh, for a moment I thought the article was about Autobots ...
        
         | rzzzt wrote:
         | Wage your-battle to-destroy the-evil forces-of...
        
         | trm42 wrote:
         | Same here! Was expecting speculative implementation or
         | comparison how their setup would be and what kind of algorithms
         | etc there could be.
        
         | Applejinx wrote:
         | Less than meets the eye
        
         | libria wrote:
         | "As an Autobot, should I buy life insurance or car insurance?"
        
           | G3rn0ti wrote:
           | Lol
        
         | jhgb wrote:
         | It's actually about Decepticons?
        
           | failwhaleshark wrote:
           | I am... Megatron!
        
             | lapp0 wrote:
             | Inferior fleshlings lay before me... as barely breathing
             | hunks of meat
             | 
             | With the blood of Unicron in my veins, I reign like a god
             | 
             | A god amongst insects
             | 
             | I have existed from the morning of the universe
             | 
             | And I shall exist until the last star falls from the night
             | 
             | My ultimate peace would be granted by the destruction of
             | all life, stars and nebulae
             | 
             | Leaving only nothingness and void
             | 
             | Although I have taken the form of this machine
             | 
             | I am all men as I am no man
             | 
             | And therefore
             | 
             | I am a god
             | 
             | Even in death there is no command but mine
             | 
             | Your race is of no consequence
             | 
             | Laserbeak...
             | 
             | Kill them all
        
         | teekert wrote:
         | Autobots, transform and roll out!
         | 
         | (I share your disappointment fwiw)
        
       | xmaayy wrote:
       | (DID NOT READ THE ENTIRE PAPER, only the abstract, the definition
       | of the language and some of the experiments)
       | 
       | Note sure how useful this is in the larger context of
       | transformers. Transformers (and deep networks in general) are
       | often used when the logic to be used in solving a problem is
       | largely unknown. Example -- How do you write a RASP program that
       | identifies names in a document?
       | 
       | They do have some simple RASP examples in the paper of things
       | that a transformer model can accomplish (Symbolic Reasoning in
       | Transformers) but, again, this is usually something that the
       | model can do as a result of the task it was originally trained
       | for, not a task in and of itself.
        
         | canjobear wrote:
         | The point isn't that you can write programs in RASP. It's that
         | you can use RASP as a tool to reason about what tasks
         | Transformers will be good and bad at and how their architecture
         | influences that.
        
       | PaulHoule wrote:
       | A neural networks paper written as if computer science matters --
       | I love it!
        
       | 0-_-0 wrote:
       | This is nice, however simple fully connected or convolutional
       | networks can encode computer programs too. In fact, the hope for
       | RNNs was that they will learn computer programs, but due to the
       | weirdness of neural network training that never happened in
       | practice to a satisfying degree. So finding a programming model
       | for Transformers is not necessarily as practical as it first
       | seems, since there's no guarantee that they will learn these
       | programs from data.
        
         | phreeza wrote:
         | I think the point here is that all architectures can execute a
         | certain type of program. An RNN maps to a finite state
         | automaton, and this is an attempt at showing what the natural
         | class of programs a transformer can implement is.
        
           | siekmanj wrote:
           | Actually, I think it is conventional neural networks which
           | can only approximate finite state machines. RNNs are (in
           | theory, not so much in practice) Turing complete.
        
             | thomasahle wrote:
             | > RNNs are Turing complete.
             | 
             | Turing completeness requires access to unlimited read/write
             | memory. RNNs only have a fixed dimensional state. I guess
             | I'm theory that starte is continuous, but it has to be a
             | pretty optimistic model that assumes we can handle
             | unbounded data like that.
        
               | [deleted]
        
       | KhoomeiK wrote:
       | I believe [1] is the work they're mainly referencing for their
       | RNN equivalent/inspiration.
       | 
       | [1] https://nlp.stanford.edu/~johnhew/rnns-hierarchy.html
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-06-16 23:01 UTC)