Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Overfitting is a great way to make rapid gains, but much of it is illusory.

I'm not sure why you think this is the case for L4. Do you mean since it can be geo/weather restricted the learning task is easier? Surely weather plays a large role but I don't see why other L4 companies necessarily overfit more (also how does overfitting provide rapid gains?). If you overfit when training for your L4 system...it's not an L4 system.

> Even if true, LiDAR wouldn't help as it cannot see painted lane lines and is extremely weak at object identification.

True, but:

A) Again, the test is reliable detection which is simply out of reach atm from single-sensor input

B) HD maps help a lot with this issue since the lane lines become less important



When you limit your service area, it becomes feasible to train your models on pretty much (or literally) every road in the service area. Every single permutation of weird intersection it will ever come across. If your L4 car only ever has to drive in San Francisco, it doesn't matter that this ML model would have no hope when introduced to Salt Lake City. The model never has to spend a moment excluding any of the millions of potential things it has never been trained on and will never see.

Both the ease of data collection and the absence of contextual noise makes L4 machine learning an order of magnitude easier.

Can you point me towards any recent FSD Beta video where there was an important failure of object detection?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: