Contemporary vision benchmarks predominantly consider tasks on which humans can achieve near-perfect performance. However, humans are frequently presented with visual data that they cannot classify with 100% certainty, and models trained on standard vision benchmarks achieve low performance when evaluated on this data. To address this issue, we introduce a procedure for creating datasets of ambiguous images and use it to produce SQUID-E ("Squidy"), a collection of noisy images extracted from videos. All images are annotated with ground truth values and a test set is annotated with human uncertainty judgments. We use this dataset to characterize human uncertainty in vision tasks and evaluate existing visual event classification models. Experimental results suggest that existing vision models are not sufficiently equipped to provide meaningful outputs for ambiguous images and that datasets of this nature can be used to assess and improve such models through model training and direct evaluation of model calibration. These findings motivate large-scale ambiguous dataset creation and further research focusing on noisy visual data.1

A t the world's biggest car fair, which opened in Beijing on Friday, there were hundreds of manufacturers, more than 1,000 vehicles, hundreds of thousands of enthusiasts - and hardly anyone behind a wheel. China's car companies have cornered the domestic electric vehicle market, and are increasingly visible on the global stage . Now they are turning their attention to what they are betting is the future of mobility: autonomous driving. At the Beijing Auto Fair, a huge industry event that covers 380,000 square metres on the outskirts of the capital, the country's carmakers showed off a range of intelligent driving technologies. In China's cut-throat domestic market, nearly every big carmaker is investing heavily in the software and computing power needed to make "hands-free" driving a reality as they compete to offer additional perks and find new ways to generate revenue.

We consider the safe reinforcement learning (RL) problem of maximizing utility with extremely low constraint violation rates. Assuming no prior knowledge or pre-training of the environment safety model given a task, an agent has to learn, via exploration, which states and actions are safe. A popular approach in this line of research is to combine a model-free RL algorithm with the Lagrangian method to adjust the weight of the constraint reward relative to the utility reward dynamically. It relies on a single policy to handle the conflict between utility and constraint rewards, which is often challenging. We present SEditor, a two-policy approach that learns a safety editor policy transforming potentially unsafe actions proposed by a utility maximizer policy into safe ones.

Coordinate-based networks, usually in the forms of MLPs, have been successfully applied to the task of predicting high-frequency but low-dimensional signals using coordinate inputs. To scale them to model large-scale signals, previous works resort to hybrid representations, combining a coordinate-based network with a grid-based representation, such as sparse voxels. However, such approaches lack a compact global latent representation in its grid, making it difficult to model a distribution of signals, which is important for generalization tasks. To address the limitation, we propose the Levels-of-Experts (LoE) framework, which is a novel coordinate-based representation consisting of an MLP with periodic, positiondependent weights arranged hierarchically. For each linear layer of the MLP, multiple candidate values of its weight matrix are tiled and replicated across the input space, with different layers replicating at different frequencies. Based on the input, only one of the weight matrices is chosen for each layer. This greatly increases the model capacity without incurring extra computation or compromising generalization capability. We show that the new representation is an efficient and competitive drop-in replacement for a wide range of tasks, including signal fitting, novel view synthesis, and generative modeling.

To understand neural network behavior, recent works quantitatively compare different networks' learned representations using canonical correlation analysis (CCA), centered kernel alignment (CKA), and other dissimilarity measures. Unfortunately, these widely used measures often disagree on fundamental observations, such as whether deep networks differing only in random initialization learn similar representations. These disagreements raise the question: which, if any, of these dissimilarity measures should we believe? We provide a framework to ground this question through a concrete test: measures should have sensitivity to changes that affect functional behavior, and specificity against changes that do not. We quantify this through a variety of functional behaviors including probing accuracy and robustness to distribution shift, and examine changes such as varying random initialization and deleting principal components. We find that current metrics exhibit different weaknesses, note that a classical baseline performs surprisingly well, and highlight settings where all metrics appear to fail, thus providing a challenge set for further improvement.

To understand neural network behavior, recent works quantitatively compare different networks' learned representations using canonical correlation analysis (CCA), centered kernel alignment (CKA), and other dissimilarity measures. Unfortunately, these widely used measures often disagree on fundamental observations, such as whether deep networks differing only in random initialization learn similar representations. These disagreements raise the question: which, if any, of these dissimilarity measures should we believe? We provide a framework to ground this question through a concrete test: measures should have sensitivity to changes that affect functional behavior, and specificity against changes that do not. We quantify this through a variety of functional behaviors including probing accuracy and robustness to distribution shift, and examine changes such as varying random initialization and deleting principal components. We find that current metrics exhibit different weaknesses, note that a classical baseline performs surprisingly well, and highlight settings where all metrics appear to fail, thus providing a challenge set for further improvement.