You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I guess there is an errata page at the publisher, but I'm more concerned about author seeing this. The initial explanations of functions with mixtures of math, diagrams, and code written a few different ways confusingly mixes up ReLU and LeakyReLU repeatedly.
For example, in Figue 1-1, the diagram labelled "ReLU function" shows a LearkyReLU. On page 6, the code defines leaky_relu correctly, but then the note immediately below says that x.clip(min=0) (i.e. ReLU) is equivalent.
I can just see the process in writing of vacillating between whether ReLU or LeakyReLU is a better example, but the result would be really mysterious to someone who was not already familiar with both of those.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I guess there is an errata page at the publisher, but I'm more concerned about author seeing this. The initial explanations of functions with mixtures of math, diagrams, and code written a few different ways confusingly mixes up ReLU and LeakyReLU repeatedly.
For example, in Figue 1-1, the diagram labelled "ReLU function" shows a LearkyReLU. On page 6, the code defines
leaky_relu
correctly, but then the note immediately below says thatx.clip(min=0)
(i.e. ReLU) is equivalent.I can just see the process in writing of vacillating between whether ReLU or LeakyReLU is a better example, but the result would be really mysterious to someone who was not already familiar with both of those.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: