3 ms·
What we lack is an AI equivalent of a theory of aerodynamics. At the moment we're just brute forcing random solution when we have perfectly good systems we shou
by rdlecler1 9y ago
What we lack is an AI equivalent of a theory of aerodynamics. At the moment we're just brute forcing random solution when we have perfectly good systems we should be trying to reverse engineer: biological brains. This will likely require genetic & evutionary algorithms, a developmental genotype-phenotype mapping, and competitive ecological systems for open ended evolution. Right now we have back propogration which is effectively reinforcement learning--just one piece of the puzzle. I actually applied to Hinton's lab in 2009 for a postdoct position to address these very issues. He said they didn't have any money and were not taking new postdocs.
- tehramz 9y agoI've never understood this about "AI". Why do we think that our brains or animal brains are the most effective models for intelligence? Just because we evolved to have a brain that works a certain way doesn't mean it's the most efficient or even efficient at all. Of course, I don't have much experience with AI other than what I've read.
- uoaei 9y agoDo you have much experience with brains? Are you aware of the ratio of computational capacity to energy requirements that is as yet unmatched in power? Not to mention that, as a system, the brain is highly efficient in reusing modular structures for increasingly complex tasks. I have a feeling when people mention "AI modelled after a brain" they consider a simplification of neuronal dynamics to be how to achieve that. But that is a very naïve way to do it. Looking at it from the system level is the more fruitful approach, IMHO.