some solid work, team Imagga!

“The results from the model above are the best so far”

I respectfully disagree 😛
Looking forward to meeting you next week 🙂

Could you share the results? We’re quite surprised we didn’t make it to the finals 🙂

Thanks for the feedback, Preslav. Much appreciated.

Normalization – replace the column1/column2 ocurrences in the snippet with . All our extra vocabulary has this syntax

We do nothing special for the asymmetricity other than the used model architectures (blstms should be quite contributing to tackling this subtask)

We’ll post the F1 and other data in a separate blog post.. Didn’t have much time to crunch these numbers as well

As for improvement – yup. Based on gut-feeling confidence, we think can squeeze out at least 2-3% out of this, mostly via larger hyperparam search

Cheers,
A

We could, but.. we’re honestly quite tired, so we’ll skip this now and leave it for later on. It’s not relevant for the overall task anyways:

From the Ontotext case – ” … The teams will only need to identify if there is a relation of type _is parent of_ . … “.

We’ve done that – is_parent column (like in the training data) is present 🙂