News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:ImageNet contains naturally occurring Apple NeuralHash co... by dhosek on Thursday August 19, 2021 @03:54PM (#28238547)
In fact, I'd argue that the collision rate per image pair is overestimating the collision rate. It's the flip side of the birthday paradox. We don't care that any two images have the same hash, we care about any image having the same hash as one in the set that we're testing against.
Re:ImageNet contains naturally occurring Apple NeuralHash co... by SilasX on Thursday August 19, 2021 @04:35PM (#28239030)
>We don't care that any two images have the same hash,

Why not?

Re:ImageNet contains naturally occurring Apple NeuralHash co... by snet0 on Thursday August 19, 2021 @06:16PM (#28240035)
Based on the pigeonhole principle alone, it will always be the case that collisions exist. The size of the digest is very likely smaller than the size of any given image.
Re:ImageNet contains naturally occurring Apple NeuralHash co... by SilasX on Thursday August 19, 2021 @09:09PM (#28241279)
How is that relevant to whether “per image” or “Per image pair” is the right metric?

Heck, how is it relevant to anything given that hash functions avoid collisions in practice, even given the pigeonhole principle?