@Mithical Hi, could you help me understanding a piece of pseudo-code related to deep learning?

@linear_combinatori_probabi I'm the wrong person to ask, I'm afraid; I'm not involved much in the implementation side of AI, more on the theory and philosophy side

It's OK. The pseudo-code is from a paper

arxiv.org/pdf/1604.06174.pdf

I'm reading Alg.2. I don't understand how it work, especially the line nested in the double-for-loop: a[v] = new node [...]

The paper is about reducing GPU memory by recomputing some of the intermediate results (between layers)

@NeilSlater I disagree with you. My experience has shown that leaving poor posts open is just deteriorating for the site - in fact, in my view, poor quality was the main reason why our site never took off, until I came along... Poor posts should be closed immediately. It's not our fault if the OP doesn't know the rules. I am not saying we should not inform the OP of what happened or that we shouldn't be polite, but that we should not let poor posts open. If a post is unclear, it should be closed.

As simple as that. If it doesn't get reopened, the OP can ask another question.

It's all about trade-offs. If we want to be super nice, we never close anything and everything can be asked, but, unfortunately, that goes against the idea of keeping the quality of the site high.

Moreover, the same argument that you used for posts that are reopened slowly or never reopened can be applied to posts that should be closed but are never closed.

I actually visited this chat now to complain about the recent posts that have been created. Do we want posts like this or this? I don't want to see these posts. Basically, the last 4-5 posts that were created are quite poor. If we allow them to survive, then soon our site will be like it was before. And goodbye high-quality! And goodbye experts that stop believing in our site, etc.

Having said that, that post was recreated here, it seems, although I didn't really read it...

@Mithical Hey! Can you please close this as a duplicate of this, this and this?

I suggested the OP to split the post into 3, one for each equation