User talk:Zer0int1

August 2023
Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Loab, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Interesting analysis, but Wikipedia policy is that this kind of research needs to have been published or reported on, it's not enough that you've posted it to Twitter. Belbury (talk) 08:44, 9 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Sorry about that! I mistakenly assumed that this was fine due to 1) another Twitter user being cited as the source for the article and 2) indeed disclosing that I am posting my own findings (same username). As for the (to me, fuzzy) concept of having been "published or reported on": I have published the source code I used available on github; it builds on a repository that was released together with a research paper. These sources are all cited in the readme.md, and all dependencies are also free and / or open source. Alas, feel free to check it out yourself (or forward to people interested in this): https://github.com/zer0int/CLIP-text-image-interpretability
 * As many class activations result, including where CLIP's attention is on the background, the puppet, etc., here's the prompt I've used with SDXL as of the class activation mappings + experimenting with what CLIP is "looking at" to be most representative:
 * "ptsd haunted injured stitches roseanne dark scariest chernobyl autopsy hostage" + "portrait"
 * Sorry again for the inconvenience - the edit I made was with the best of intentions! Zer0int1 (talk) 11:09, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
 * No problem! Thanks for trying to contribute.
 * The No original research and Reliable sources essays should help clarify the jargon that Wikipedia is using here. It's basically that Wikipedia is only written using published press, book and journal sources, and not from personal Twitter or Github sources. Although the Loab article does reference the Twitter user who found and named it, that's because the discovery got some press attention. If it had just been an interesting Twitter thread, it wouldn't have an article.
 * Your investigation into the phenomenon looks useful, but Wikipedia articles don't cite personal research directly. Belbury (talk) 14:55, 9 August 2023 (UTC)