4 ms·
Of course that depends on what you mean by "real accomplishments". It seems to me that that deep nets have effectively maximized the potential of using gradien
by randcraw 5y ago
Of course that depends on what you mean by "real accomplishments".
It seems to me that that deep nets have effectively maximized the potential of using gradient pursuit to model patterns. But if you remove gradients from your data, or shrink your data down to tens of samples, or shift the problem to logic, or need to use functions that aren't convex or differentiable, deep nets run smack into a wall.
Luckily human perception makes extensive use of gradients, as does most search, so problems in those arenas have been unsurprisingly amenable to solution using deep nets (vision, speech, game play, etc). But many of the problems that remain untouched by DL, like human cognition, are NOT driven by gradients. Will deep nets eventually fill that void? I doubt it. You can convert only so many problems with big data into gradients to pursue them efficiently with DL before that transformation trick runs out of steam.
Personally I think deep net language modeling is one of those areas, and soon we'll encounter the limit of their generalizable contextual phrase association. Then because deep nets are so difficult to selectively revise or extend the specifics that they have learned, the vanguard of ever more complex deep nets (transformers) will eventually sink beneath their own weight, taking the last best hope for DL-based general AI with them.
- nicolapede 5y ago> But many of the problems that remain untouched by DL, like human cognition, are NOT driven by gradients. This seems to me quite a deep insight. But how would you formally define a process that is gradient-based?
- whimsicalism 5y ago> But if you remove gradients from your data, or shrink your data down to tens of samples, or shift the problem to logic, or need to use functions that aren't convex or differentiable, deep nets run smack into a wall, We're making some progress on the convexity bit (heat functions, RL, etc.), but yes, there are other areas of statistical research all involved in trying to solve those sorts of problems. ML is not necessarily a panacea, but just because you can point to problems that it doesn't solve doesn't mean it has no "real accomplishments." > DL, like human cognition, are NOT driven by gradients. ???