• FooBarrington@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    8 months ago

    Besides the point the other commenter already made, I’d like to add that inference isn’t deterministic per model. There are a bunch of sources of inconsistency:

    • GPU hardware/software can influence the results of floating point operations
    • Different inference implementations can change the order of operations (and matrix operations aren’t necessarily commutative)
    • Different RNG implementations can change the space of possible seed images
    • onion@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      If you generate with the same prompt and settings you get what I would consider the same image except for tiny variations (they aren’t matching pixel-perfect)

      Edit: A piece of paper has a random 3D relief of fibers, so the exact position a printer ink droplet ends up at is also not deterministic, and so no two copies of a physical catalog are identical. But we would still consider them the “same” catalog

      • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        If there’s slight variation, it means it’s not the same image.

        And that’s skipping over different RNG etc. You can build a machine learning model today and give it to me, tomorrow I can create a new RNG - suddenly the model can produce images it couldn’t ever produce before.

        It’s very simple: the possible resulting images aren’t purely determined by the model, as you claimed.