4 ms·
This sounds like the neural net just learned how to identify an input parameter to the simulator based on some of its output. It might be noteworthy if we coul
by TimTheTinker 5y ago
This sounds like the neural net just learned how to identify an input parameter to the simulator based on some of its output.
It might be noteworthy if we could assume the simulator's behavior is equivalent to natural laws and starting conditions to within some absurdly small error bound, but there's no way that level of accuracy is possible (unless I'm mistaken).
- lucb1e 5y agoThe generator for a simulation may not be able to predict what the real Earth would look like correctly given infinite Earth-like planets, but that doesn't mean that this algorithm wouldn't be able to correctly deduce some input parameter for the real Earth after training in the sim (like the number of days in a year based on a single minute of simulated video from the surface). It's a bit of a stretch to call it proof, but the article says they spent half a year of work on making sure it's not just an artifact of the simulation they're basing the prediction on. I wouldn't be surprised if this did actually work, if we could ever collect equivalent real-world data.