Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

adventuringraw t1_j9in5sj wrote

Reply to comment by relevantmeemayhere in [D] "Deep learning is the only thing that currently works at scale" by GraciousReformer

I mean... the statement specifically uses the phrase 'arbitrary functions'. GLMs are a great tool in the toolbox, but the function family it optimizes over is very far from 'arbitrary'.

I think the statement's mostly meaning 'find very nonlinear functions of interest when dealing with very large numbers of samples from very high dimensional sample spaces'. GLM's are used in every scientific field, but certainly not for every application. Some form of deep learning really is the only game in town still for certain kinds of problems at least.

70

relevantmeemayhere t1_j9kin48 wrote

I agree with you. I was just pointing out that to say they are the only solution is foolish, as the quote implied

This quote could have just been used without much context, so grain of salt.

2

adventuringraw t1_j9ll3fp wrote

I can see how the quote could be made slightly more accurate. In particular, tabular data in general is still better tackled with something like XGBoost instead of deep learning, so deep learning certainly hasn't turned everything into a nail for one universal hammer yet.

1