3 ms·
The point here is that dimensionality reduction does not need to be done by inferring higher level concepts like headlights. That there are scenarios in which h
by MrQuincle 11y ago
The point here is that dimensionality reduction does not need to be done by inferring higher level concepts like headlights. That there are scenarios in which humans have easy models at hand is common knowledge.
You can randomly throw stuff away! That's the new thing here.
Of course it is a very rough setup. However that the brain performs random projections is an interesting hypothesis and they actually compared it with human subjects which is a plus.
Compared to model-heavy or deterministic scenarios in which there are "boring" dimensionality reduction techniques, random projections might also explain secondary effects, such as better resilience against overfitting.
- fauigerzigerk 11y ago>The point here is that dimensionality reduction does not need to be done by inferring higher level concepts like headlights. I get that, and it is a very useful result. But what I was wondering about is whether humans can ever "switch off" high level reasoning when they perceive sensory information. Even when the image is supposedly abstract, humans may be making stuff up, and that might influence perception and dimensionality reduction, similar to what's happening in a Rorschach test. And that's why I don't believe that what the paper shows is actually "How the Brain Can Handle So Much Data" -- the title of the linked article.