3 ms·
Well, people here seem to disagree, so take this for what it's worth, but executing a neural net doesnt have a series of logical steps like an algorithm (add X
by Epskampie 4y ago
Well, people here seem to disagree, so take this for what it's worth, but executing a neural net doesnt have a series of logical steps like an algorithm (add X to Y), but instead knowledge is implicitly stored in the link strengths of the neural network that leads to a certain output.
Since there isn't a plain sequence of steps that can be followed to explain the output, i'd say a different term is justified. Whether you call that "intelligence" is debatable.
- tasuki 4y ago> Since there isn't a plain sequence of steps that can be followed to explain the output There is a sequence of steps, it's just very long and unintelligible to humans. I'm not even sure I disagree with you: Quantity has a quality of its own.
- CapsAdmin 4y agoIf those sequences of steps are intentionally designed I lean more towards it being algorithm. It gets a little confusing when thinking about writing a path finding algorithm that takes you from A to B using randomness to get there (trying different spatial directions) You wrote the code that tries random directions, but you are not choosing which directions it takes when executed.