HackerTrans
トップ新着トレンドコメント過去質問紹介求人

NeoInHacker

no profile record

投稿

Mojo GPU Puzzles, Edition 1

puzzles.modular.com
2 ポイント·投稿者 NeoInHacker·3 か月前·0 コメント

Going Beyond World Models and VLAs

generalistai.com
1 ポイント·投稿者 NeoInHacker·3 か月前·1 コメント

Qwen3Guard Technical Report

huggingface.co
1 ポイント·投稿者 NeoInHacker·9 か月前·0 コメント

World Simulation with Video Foundation Models for Physical AI

research.nvidia.com
2 ポイント·投稿者 NeoInHacker·9 か月前·0 コメント

Discrete Diffusion in Large Language and Multimodal Models: A Survey

arxiv.org
2 ポイント·投稿者 NeoInHacker·10 か月前·0 コメント

The First Principle of Interesting v.s. Boring judgement

neothinksphilosophy.blogspot.com
1 ポイント·投稿者 NeoInHacker·10 か月前·2 コメント

Igniting VLMs Toward the Embodied Space

arxiv.org
2 ポイント·投稿者 NeoInHacker·10 か月前·0 コメント

Seed Diffusion Preview

seed.bytedance.com
2 ポイント·投稿者 NeoInHacker·10 か月前·2 コメント

Towards a Physics Foundation Model

arxiv.org
117 ポイント·投稿者 NeoInHacker·10 か月前·30 コメント

コメント

NeoInHacker
·3 か月前·議論
[dead]
NeoInHacker
·3 か月前·議論
so what their model may looks like?
NeoInHacker
·3 か月前·議論
I'm working on the wolrd model action (WMA) model, which is used to replace Visual Language Action (VLA) model to bridge the physical world with LLM.

Now I've done my basic researching part, but I'm lack of the courage to dive into this topic. After all, it's a really hard work to it.

So I'm just, you know, scrolling the HN and trying to sharpen my brain and get back to the work.
NeoInHacker
·6 か月前·議論
sounds "it's okey" ?
NeoInHacker
·7 か月前·議論
China: You are welcome
NeoInHacker
·9 か月前·議論
yeah, it's lame
NeoInHacker
·10 か月前·議論
Yeah, so I think high density informational materials can save one from this feeling. And the measurement of the "interesting degree" it how many information can it provide.
NeoInHacker
·10 か月前·議論
What's app? WeChat?
NeoInHacker
·10 か月前·議論
What's app?WeChat?
NeoInHacker
·10 か月前·議論
Why diffusion LLMs' performance cannot beat Auto Regressive LLM now?
NeoInHacker
·10 か月前·議論
Yeah, It’s true that PDEs are the "top-tier tool" for describing physical phenomena—from the laws of motion in classical mechanics and electromagnetic waves in electromagnetism to the evolution of wave functions in quantum mechanics, they accurately model most macroscopic, classical scenarios. However, when it comes to covering all physical phenomena, they really "fall short": in quantum gravity, spacetime may be discontinuous, making the concept of differentiation meaningless; for complex systems like turbulence, PDEs cannot be solved nor can they capture macroscopic laws; even for the randomness of quantum measurements, PDEs can only predict probability distributions and fail to explain the underlying nature. In short, they are a "top-tier auxiliary," but by no means a "one-size-fits-all key."
NeoInHacker
·10 か月前·議論
Seems great, but hard to be used