tough one

excellent

Excelente

Thank you

was good

Awesome.

easy bb

helpful

Great!

NICE!!

作业过于简单

Useful

great

Good!

Nice

good

bugs

good

good

ok

ok

e

I've loved Andrew Ng's other courses, but this course was boring and not well-organized. The lectures were unfocused and they rambled a lot; they're nearly the opposite style of Prof. Ng's other material, which I found extremely well-organized. Most topics could be shortened 33-50% with no of clarity.

The course structure itself could use improvement:

The first part of Week 3 (Hyperparameter Tuning) belongs in Week 2.

The third part of Week 3 (Multi-Class Classification) should be its own week and its own assignment and could really be its own course. This is *THE* problem that almost every "applied" machine learning paper I've read is attempting to solve, whether by deep learning or some other class of algorithms. (Context and full disclosure: I'm a Ph.D. Geophysicist and my research is in seismology and volcanology.)

The introduction to TensorFlow needs to explain how objects and data structures work in TF. It really needs to explain the structure and syntax of the feed dictionary.

In the programming assignment for Week 3, there are three issues: (a) The correct use of feed_dict in 1.3 is completely new and cannot be guessed from the instructions or the TF website, and it's not clear why we use float32 for Y instead of int64; (b) In 1.4, "tf.one_hot(labels, depth, axis)" should be "tf.one_hot(labels, depth, axis=axis_number)". (c) In 2.1, the expected output for Y should have shape (6,?), not (10,?).

As an old school (80s) software developer I feel uncomfortable about the lack of formal teaching on the structure and principles of TensorFlow. Sure, I can write the code and fly through the programming assignment, I "kind of" get it, but for a thorough engineer, that "kind of" creates a sense of unease. I wish Andrew Ng, being the incredible practical teacher he is with the theory of Machine Learning, would have spent a bit more time reviewing that particularly practical topic of TensorFlow more in depth, because 1h on it would bring much more value than say, understanding the inner working of batch norm, especially to an engineer ready to onboard a new project and start creating. For example, when should you use a placeholder vs a variable and why? Why is there a "name" parameter in the constructor of a variable, when should I make good use for the difference between the name at a tf level and its actual Python variable name? etc... Unlike Matlab or Numpy, TensorFlow looks to me like it could use a bit more theory before practice. Next class? :)

Nice explanation of Adam. Extremely minimal introduction to tensorflow; I felt unprepared to deal with all programming error messages I encountered when using TF. I would have liked to have had more exposure to softmax outputs as well; the multi-class case is new here. My biggest complaint is that there was quite a bit of time spent trying to explain batch normalization and no corresponding programming assignment. Also, in the past I felt I had my hand held a little too much in the programming exercises, whereas when tensorflow was introduced I felt I'd been thrown by that hand into the abyss; the expected output could not help me debug because it seemingly was designed to remind me over and over that tf.Session.run was needed to give value to tf variables. ya... I think you guys have some work to do on this course.