Based on [[https://schlockmercenary.fandom.com/wiki/The_Seventy_Maxims_of_Maximally_Effective_Mercenaries|The Seventy Maxims of Maximally Effective Mercenaries]]. This was suggested by Not Louis, and not Louis. Written by [[DeepSeek-R1]]. *. Preprocess, then train. *. A training loop in motion outranks a perfect architecture that isn’t implemented. *. A debugger with a stack trace outranks everyone else. *. Regularization covers a multitude of sins. *. Feature importance and data leakage should be easier to tell apart. *. If increasing model complexity wasn’t your last resort, you failed to add enough layers. *. If the accuracy is high enough, stakeholders will stop complaining about the compute costs. *. Harsh critiques have their place—usually in the rejected pull requests. *. Never turn your back on a deployed model. *. Sometimes the only way out is through… through another epoch. *. Every dataset is trainable—at least once. *. A gentle learning rate turneth away divergence. Once the loss stabilizes, crank it up. *. Do unto others’ hyperparameters as you would have them do unto yours. *. “Innovative architecture” means never asking, “What’s the worst thing this could hallucinate?” *. Only you can prevent vanishing gradients. *. Your model is in the leaderboards: be sure it has dropout. *. The longer training goes without overfitting, the bigger the validation-set disaster. *. If the optimizer is leading from the front, watch for exploding gradients in the rear. *. The field advances when you turn competitors into collaborators, but that’s not the same as your h-index advancing. *. If you’re not willing to prune your own layers, you’re not willing to deploy. *. Give a model a labeled dataset, and it trains for a day. Take its labels away and call it “self-supervised,” and it’ll generate new ones for you to validate tomorrow. *. If you’re manually labeling data, somebody’s done something wrong. *. Training loss and validation loss should be easier to tell apart. *. Any sufficiently advanced algorithm is indistinguishable from a matrix multiplication. *. If your model’s failure is covered by the SLA, you didn’t test enough edge cases. *. “Fire-and-forget training” is fine, provided you never actually forget to monitor the run. *. Don’t be afraid to be the first to try a random seed. *. If the cost of cloud compute is high enough, you might get promoted for shutting down idle instances. *. The enemy of my bias is my variance. No more. No less. *. A little inductive bias goes a long way. The less you use, the further you'll scale. *. Only overfitters prosper (temporarily). *. Any model is production-ready if you can containerize it. *. If you’re logging metrics, you’re being audited. *. If you’re seeing NaN, you need a smaller learning rate. *. That which does not break your model has made a suboptimal adversarial example. *. When the loss plateaus, the wise call for more data. *. There is no “overkill.” There is only “more tokens” and “CUDA out of memory.” *. What’s trivial in Jupyter can still crash in production. *. There’s a difference between spare GPUs and GPUs you’ve accidentally mined Ethereum on. *. Not all NaN is a bug—sometimes it’s a feature. *. “Do you have a checkpoint?” means “I can’t fix this training run.” *. “They’ll never expect this activation function” means “I want to try something non-differentiable.” *. If it’s a hack and it works, it’s still a hack and you’re lucky. *. If it can parallelize inference, it can double as a space heater. *. The size of the grant is inversely proportional to the reproducibility of the results. *. Don’t try to save money by undersampling. *. Don’t expect the data to cooperate in the creation of your dream benchmark. *. If it ain’t overfit, it hasn’t been trained on enough epochs. *. Every client is one missed deadline away from switching to AutoML, and every AutoML is one custom loss function away from becoming a client. *. If it only works on the training set, it’s defective. *. Let them see you tune the hyperparameters before you abandon the project. *. The framework you’ve got is never the framework you want. *. The data you’ve got is never the data you want. *. It’s only too many layers if you can’t fit them in VRAM. *. It’s only too much compute if the power grid collapses. *. Data engineers exist to format tables for people with real GPUs. *. Reinforcement learning exists to burn through compute budgets on simulated environments. *. The whiteboard is mightiest when it sketches architectures for more transformers. *. “Two baselines is probably not going to be enough.” *. A model’s inference time is inversely proportional to the urgency of the demo. *. Don’t bring BERT into a logistic regression. *. Any tensor labeled “output” is dangerous at both ends. *. The CTO knows how to do it by knowing who Googled it. *. An ounce of precision is worth a pound of recall. *. After the merge, be the one with the main branch, not the one with the conflicts. *. Necessity is the mother of synthetic data. *. If you can’t explain it, cite the arXiv paper. *. Deploying with confidence intervals doesn’t mean you shouldn’t also deploy with a kill switch. *. Sometimes SOTA is a function of who had the biggest TPU pod. *. Failure is not an option—it is mandatory. The option is whether to let failure be the last epoch or a learning rate adjustment.