For example, what if we decide to say that a 0.921 value means a device is a copy, and we find out that Samsungs older devices get a 0.884 confidence?
All those values are very artificial.
For example, what if we decide to say that a 0.921 value means a device is a copy, and we find out that Samsungs older devices get a 0.884 confidence?
All those values are very artificial.
So, while I believe the intellectual "property" should be eliminated, it's not because of the continuity involved in enforcing it.
Don't think of Neural nets as a higher order intelligence - it's only as clever as the sample data used, but rather something that can make consistent decisions.
Here's a guideline: if there is a document in your company saying ("let's copy this thing") --as in Samsung's case--, it's a copy.
Or if you created your design from leaked photos of prototypes ("as in this case") --it's a copy.
For the rest, how about a "jury" (i.e impartial to both parties common people)?
In the case of a real copy, the classifier should have a confidence of 1.0, or be enormously close to it.