3 ms·
When the process being studied has more moving parts than humans can grasp in working memory there comes a limit after which we can't understand it anymore. May
by visarga 4y ago
When the process being studied has more moving parts than humans can grasp in working memory there comes a limit after which we can't understand it anymore. Maybe the nice clean abstract concepts we expect are not there. It could be perfectly correct and yet complicated like front-end spaghetti code.
- tsimionescu 4y agoThat is possible, yes. But that doesn't make the question of "why?" meaningless, as the GGP was suggesting.
- visarga 4y agoI see neural nets as extensions of human thought - they explore the fuzzy depths where we can't grasp directly, like a microscope or a telescope enhance vision. They are enhanced correlation engines.
- freemint 4y agoThere explainable AI approaches using neural networks. Those approaches can answer why questions. I am trying to parse what you are saying but it is utterly meaningless in the context of the previous conversation.
- visarga 4y agoHumans have limited working memory but problems don't care about that and can be much more complex than we can handle. In these situations using the neural net as a "microscope" to zoom into the data might bring some insights from that complexity region that is out of reach for us.