> "While we can definitively say this weakening is happening, we are unable to say to what extent it is related to climate change or whether it is a natural variation," [the first co-author] Piecuch said. "We can see similar weakening indicated in climate models, but for this paper we were not able to put together the observational evidence that would really allow us to pinpoint the cause of the observed decline."
but also...
> [The second co-author] Beal added, "The Gulf Stream is a vital artery of the ocean's circulation, and so the ramifications of its weakening are global. I used to think of the ocean as our last remaining frontier, wild, pristine, and indomitable. It saddens me to acknowledge, from our study and so many others, and from recent record-breaking headlines, that even the remotest parts of the ocean are now in the grip of our addiction to fossil fuels." (emphasis mine)
Seems a little disingenuous to state in the publication that you cannot conclude the cause of the decline, and then in the press release go about definitively blaming it on fossil fuels, including stating that this conclusion is supported by your study.
I read this paper as commenting on the second-order derivative of benchmark progress with respect to DL techniques. The trends presented start with 2012-era models with 2012 data, and end with 2020 results for 2020-era models. Thus the extrapolation on training costs accounts for the current pace+style of progress and innovation in all relevant subareas of ML. To me it seems that it’s saying “if research continues in the same trends as it has from 2012 to 2020, here is where we will end up in 2035.”
In other words, in order for us to buckle the trend we would need to start innovating in ways that are unlike the ways that got us from AlexNet to here.
> "While we can definitively say this weakening is happening, we are unable to say to what extent it is related to climate change or whether it is a natural variation," [the first co-author] Piecuch said. "We can see similar weakening indicated in climate models, but for this paper we were not able to put together the observational evidence that would really allow us to pinpoint the cause of the observed decline."
but also...
> [The second co-author] Beal added, "The Gulf Stream is a vital artery of the ocean's circulation, and so the ramifications of its weakening are global. I used to think of the ocean as our last remaining frontier, wild, pristine, and indomitable. It saddens me to acknowledge, from our study and so many others, and from recent record-breaking headlines, that even the remotest parts of the ocean are now in the grip of our addiction to fossil fuels." (emphasis mine)
Seems a little disingenuous to state in the publication that you cannot conclude the cause of the decline, and then in the press release go about definitively blaming it on fossil fuels, including stating that this conclusion is supported by your study.