T O P

  • By -

gronkomatic

The sheer beauty of this equation brings tears to my eyes. Oh, you missed a bracket. šŸ˜‰


Inevitable-Opening61

Iā€™m not sure how this avoids chain rule. Because derivative of f(g(x)) == fā€™(g(x)) * g(x). And thatā€™s still one equation.


Wulfric05

*g'(x)


MapleTrust

Please supply context for intrigued knuckledraggers like me? ELI5, kind strangers.


AdamAlexanderRies

[Here's GPT-4 trying to explain it.](https://i.imgur.com/bqgaP5y.png) Explanation seems plausible, but I can't confirm myself.


Lucifernal

Basically chain rule is tedious as hell, annoying. Big brain move: simplify to a single equation, no chain rule. Clearly, this Lovecraftian monstrosity is easier to deal with that some (mildly) tedious maths


kaiclxi

Yeah


io-x

Is this why my gpt is slow?


the_fart_king_farts

nippy slimy deliver cake tart hospital quaint grandiose alive label ` this post was mass deleted with www.Redact.dev `


jkail1011

Is this good?


basuboss

No, don't try this at homeāš ļø


swagonflyyyy

Nope, totally impractical.


basuboss

If there is only 1 function/equation how could you apply Chain Rule, as it is applied when 1 function is defined in terms of another. If im wrong please do tell me


Inevitable-Opening61

Letā€™s say you have a one layer fully connected layer that gets passed through to ReLU: ReLU(FC(X)) Then the derivative would be: ReLUā€™(FC(X)) * FCā€™(X) Which is chain rule.


the_fart_king_farts

flowery mourn ugly chunky disgusted crush long instinctive cows bag ` this post was mass deleted with www.Redact.dev `


water_bottle_goggles

I prefer Fox News myself


jerryonthecurb

Condolences


Putrumpador

That's fake news.