4 ms·
I can’t approximate a dumb calculator without significant accuracy loss. Not without emulating symbolic computation, which current AI is perfectly capable of do
by Filligree 5y ago
I can’t approximate a dumb calculator without significant accuracy loss. Not without emulating symbolic computation, which current AI is perfectly capable of doing if you ask it the right way.
Whatever makes you think it’s necessary for AGI, when we don’t have it?
- SemanticStrengh 5y agoNNs fails to do any algorithmy like pathfinding, sorting, etc The point is not that you have it it's that you can have it by learning and using a pen and paper. Natural language understanding require both neural network like pattern recognition abilities and advanced algorithmic calculations. Since neural networks are pathetically bad at algorithmy, we need neuro-symbolic software. However the symbolic part is rigid and program synthesis is exponential. Therefore the brain is the only technology on earth to be able to dynamically code algorithmic solutions. Neural networks have only solved a subset of the class of automated programs.
- visarga 5y agoThere are about 3,610 results for "neural network pathfinding" in Google Scholar since 2021. Try a search.
- SemanticStrengh 5y agoAnd as you can trivially see it is outputting nonsense values https://www.lovebirb.com/Projects/ANN-Pathfinder?pgid=kqe249l8-29dac0_9ad1dbf1bd2542148cd647a087e61989mv2 https://www.lovebirb.com/Projects/ANN-Pathfinder?pgid=kqe249... (see last slide) At least in this implementation Even if it had 80% accuracy (optimistic) it would still he too mediocre to be used at any serious scale.