Great course for kickoff into the world of CNN's. Gives a nice overview of existing architectures and certain applications of CNN's as well as giving some solid background in how they work internally.
Great Course Overall\n\nOne thing is that some videos are not edited properly so Andrew repeats the same thing, again and again, other than that great and simple explanation of such complicated tasks.
by Chengqian W•
Some technical issues/errors in lectures.
by Patrick M•
Too many mistakes in assignment material
by Karan D•
there were bugs in the jupyter notebooks
by Mohammad A•
programming assignments are not helpful
by eric v•
some of the quizzes were a little buggy
by Walid M A•
I did not like the assignments of w#4
by Pakhapoom S•
The videos need to be edited properly.
by sai d s•
Little bit hard programming Excercise
by Xirui Z•
Too hard for someone new to tf.
by Sanskar j•
Assignments can be made better
by Jisheng L•
Need improvement on assignment
by Pedro C•
notebook were not functional
by Modassir A•
need improvement of content
by Olatunji O•
Notebooks are a bit buggy
by Yi-Hao K•
Serious bug in assignment
by Yide Z•
too many errors in test
Labs should be tougher
by Kenneth C V•
Very complex Subject
by Pavao S•
Not enough theory
by neda m•
by Volker H•
too many bugs
so hard :(
It was okay. Andrew is obviously very knowledgeable, and there is a wealth of knowledge here. I could go through it a couple more times and still pick up new stuff.
That being said, I've heard him mention he did these videos at like 1 or 2 in the morning after work, and it's very obvious from the videos. He makes so many mistakes that every other lecture (it seems like) has a **CORRECTION** notification next to it. I mean it's great they give this additional correction information, but it would be even better if you just redid the video.
Furthermore, he like stops in the middle of the videos and then repeats the last sentence he said, because he made another mistake. I get it, Andrew is very successful, he's very busy, and I am definitely grateful for the knowledge he's provided in this course. But this makes for a very poor learning experience, because I'm taking notes, and I have to go back and redo them, plus the general angst you get when you're learning something and someone's like "oh wait nope that's not right, forget that." Well for God's sake I already learned it.
Finally, the submission assignments are the most annoying things I have ever come across. They are riddled with errors and misguided information where they literally tell you to use the wrong parameters, and then they never fix it. You have to go into the discussions to find out why your code is wrong, even though you're doing it right.
Then, you'll get everything right on your code for the test cases, and when you go to submit it fails you. And when I say it fails you, it gives you a literally 0 out of like 30 points. And the grader output just says "your submission was incorrect" like no way, I had no idea. Thank you for that very **cough** helpful piece of info.
If you go to the discussions, you find out this is actually a problem with how the grader is built, because if you don't format your code exactly the right way, it fails you, even if your solution is correct. I don't understand why it can be right when you run test cases, but submitting it fails.
Overall, I give it 3 stars before the poor grading, but because of the poor grading performance I have to bring it down to 2. I can't tell you how much time I wasted trying to figure out why my code was wrong just to realize it was right, but they screwed up their implementation.
In conclusion, this reminded me of a college course, where the professor has a ton of knowledge and is in high demand, and doesn't really care whether you get anything out of the course or not. It's sloppy, doesn't seem to be maintained very well, and most of the mentor's responses are literally "did you look at your colleagues similar questions?" Like no I didn't, that's why I'm asking. Why am I paying you so I can spend more time debugging your screw ups? Or maybe I did and I still don't get it because your explanations are ridiculously unclear.
I have one more course in this specialization and I absolutely can't wait for it to get over with so i can move on to more productive (and immersive, since these exercises are just one off "do this then do that" instructions, I still don't know how to set up a Deep Learning project from scratch) ways to learn Deep Learning. If Andrew wasn't so knowledgeable about this topic, I wouldn't even take it because it's that bad. But really you can't get this type of knowledge in such a condensed form anywhere else.