There isn't great library support for deep networks. This is a big deal, I don't want to spend tons of time building my own library or working with buggy/poorly supported/infant libraries. In production systems we prefer extremely well-established libraries that work in our language/environment of choice. Also deep belief networks are a couple orders of magnitude slower than linear models (probably the most commonly used type of model in industry). They require more parameter selection. They're not even useful for a lot of tasks - if I'm already spending tons of time building useful features (often a requirement in industry for non-technical reasons, like reporting or legal constraints) deep networks aren't going to be very useful. Much of their utility is taking raw, unstructured data and creating useful features for a supervised model. You can't easily interpret them as models unless you are working with visual data, they are a black box.
Re:Deep Learning - The Biggest Data Science Breakthrough of ...
by rm999 on Friday March 15, 2013 @02:16PM
(#5382083)
You missed the point of my comment. I was speaking about the hype, I wasn't putting down deep networks or making a technical analysis of the algorithms. Anyway, here are my major reservations, including my technical analysis. You're oddly demanding in a casual non-technical online discussion about a topic you don't seem qualified in, so if this isn't enough for you we really aren't going to find common ground.
By the way, I am not asking anyone what their degree is, I am just asking to bring arguments and experiences or stay neutral.