Oct 17, 2016
Very good overview of ML. The GraphLab api wasn't that bad, and also it was very wise of the instructors to allow the use of other ML packages. Overall i enjoyed it very much and also leaned very much
Dec 20, 2016
Great course!\n\nEmily and Carlos teach this class in a very interest way. They try to let student understand machine learning by some case study. That worked well on me. I like this course very much.
By Joseph J F•
Aug 20, 2017
It is more a course in using the tools designed by the teachers than machine learning. It might do something for a less experienced user in programming, but I didn't find it much use. The overview of Machine Learning tasks isn't bad.
By Evlampi H•
Nov 05, 2015
The framework is ok, but it would be more insight on the functions would be much more amplifying the learning process.
Good working examples, though!
By Piotr T•
Oct 06, 2015
it's rather a course on using API of proprietary software with very very basic background on the actual math underneath
By Eiakihonroeda M•
Mar 05, 2016
One would learn a thing or two, but the course is very sparse compared to other machine learning courses, and I didn't feel that it was worth the time and the cost.
By Carlos K R•
Oct 03, 2016
Good course! The only major drawback is the requirement of Graphlab, which doesnt allow the student to fully understand the applications using real world software. Just recently, Dato (the company that owns graphlab) was purchased by Apple, and you can no longer buy a commercial licence to the software. Despite this, users cannot use Graphlab for commercial purposes, therefore rendering the software completely impractical for professionals. The specialization is designed to help you get a job (see capstone) yet the software currently in place is limiting.
By Raphael R•
Mar 19, 2016
The overall quality of the course is good, but in my opinion the level is quite low and there is less content then I expected. The assignments are more or less copy-paste or very repetitive. The 5-8 hour work per week are a joke, I never needed more than 2.5h per week.
By Robert P M•
Oct 27, 2015
I do not like this course being tied to a commercial product. In my opinion it should be using an open source python library and not focusing on the Dato product.
By Simiao L•
Jan 03, 2016
2 stars because the theoretical part is ok but programming assignments are waste of time. I'm not here (and paid) to be trained to use something the instructor is trying to SELL, nor will I ever recommend this product for commercial use. I will switch to other "not recommended" packages in the later parts of this specialization.
They should put the disclaimer for Graphlab Create in the specialization page so people can be aware of this.
Besides, the sound of that Giraffe toy is really, really annoying.
By Morten H•
Feb 08, 2016
Poorly executed. Constant differences in data. tiresome to watch two supposedly very intelligent instructors amuse themselves by saying Bro and Dude. The use og graphlab is unnecessary and adds a layer of complication which adds no future value to your toolkit. Probably a lot of better executed Machine Learning courses out there
By Daniel J•
Jan 07, 2017
excessive use of GraphLab create which is not an industry standard.
By Patryk H•
Oct 14, 2015
Due to many technical issues with GraphLab lib I have to reduce acitivity in this curse for only video viewing :(.
By Zuozhi W•
Feb 08, 2017
TBH this class's experience is not good. The lecturers seem unprepared and they talk very repetitively.
By Bruno C S d A•
Jul 15, 2016
I have no doubt teachers are excelent professionals in the area, as well as great machine learning enthusiasts. However, I did not like the fact that you get limited to learn how to use a paid and (very!) expensive platform, mostly because there are many other free packages available for machine learning. Ok, the platform offered makes things easier, but if you really want to learn machine learning, you can not be limited to a platform, acting as a robot just using pre-written functions in a black box.
By Jean T•
Apr 17, 2017
(1) I feel I spent most of the time learning graphlab. Suggest replace it with standard Python as the standard tool for this class. Provide any needed additional code in standard Python.
(2) Course is better in the front end than in the back end.
(3) Week #6 is significantly more involved than previous weeks. Suggest divide Week 6 into two sessions: Neural Network and Nearest Neighbor applying neural network results (ImageNet 2012 was mentioned and not explained. Therefore the Nearest Neighbor homework assignment from the student's perspective does not have much to do with neural network other than using the results from ImageNet 2012, which was not explained in any detail anyway). This will allow more time to delve into the forward and backward propagation which should have been explained in more details.
(4) Home assignments are not best worded, especially homework assignment for Week 6. Suggest reword in shorter statements that are more to the point.
(5) Programming presentation and assignments can seem like exercise in graphlab and SFrame functions rather than machine learning.
(1) Class presentation by Professor Fox on recommender system is detailed and clear.
(2) Classifier block diagram shown by Professor Guestrin is good, clearly distinguishing training the classifier and the subsequent use of the classification (prediction).
(3) Neural network quiz in Week 6 is excellent. It drills down on the multi-dimensional space that neural network is particularly good for.
By Peter G•
Mar 22, 2016
The teachers are easy to like, but the course content is very lightweight and will mostly teach you terminology with no real understanding.
The worst part was the assignments, which could all be solved by a little copy/paste: I didn't learn anything useful by doing them. All the actual algorithms were supplied in a separate module. More than that, many of the suggested solutions were bad coding (like collapsing 50% of the data before training, or writing sixteen special cases rather than a general function) or pointless (like training a linear classifier on pixel data).
There are better courses out there.
By Satyam N•
Mar 26, 2018
This course doesn't give any insight about the algorithms.
By Sunaad R•
Jul 30, 2018
Too much dependency on Graphlab package is bad. If we are learning the concept, we should reduce the size of the sample data. We should be using generic open packages, so that our learning can be easily demonstrated anywhere (especially interviews), and not dependent on graphlab.
By Joseph C•
Jul 29, 2018
Overly relies on a paid software (free for the course) called GraphLab. The course can be completed without GraphLab, but expect little / no responses to questions.
By Annemarie S•
May 24, 2019
The instruction conceptually is fine, but I really disliked dealing with setting up Graph Lab Create and SFrames when we could have instead been using more commonly used open source software.
Jun 24, 2019
Content is outdated and should be revamp, the library use in this course is only for python 2.6 which is legacy and should be updated to latest python version using skicit learn instead of graphlab.
By Matthew F•
Jul 22, 2019
Focused too much on graphlab as opposed to the ML. If the course was titled ML with GraphLab I wouldn't mind (and wouldn't have signed up). The gaffs are kind of charming but really I would expect some of the videos to have had another take or two.
By Krupesh A•
Feb 15, 2019
Uses very old versions of libraries. Many students are facing issues which remains unsolved. Not recommended to pursue it.
By Chandrakant M•
Sep 06, 2016
I felt that I paid for demo of the Dato/Turi.
By Kaushik M•
May 01, 2016
Too many videos and not cluttered assignment codes
By Eduardo R R•
Sep 23, 2015
This course rely on commercial library. I am sorry, I don't believe the convenience of a commercial library is good for your learning. You may end up locked in.